According to Randy Reichardt's blog http://stlq.info/ an
anonymous source who attended the World Congress says SAE is
commited to rescinding its DRM policy and to changing its
licencing options to allow for an unrestricted number of
downloaded papers and standards per educational site.
Potentially
this could happen within the next few weeks. While this is
good
news, you're right that it still doesn't address some of our
basic license concerns. There's a new guy, Tom Drozda, now
heading up the publications program (he took over in March)
so
I'm hoping the news coming out of the World Congress is a
sign
that he understands the unique needs of SAE's academic
customers
and is going to be more reasonable about license terms. We
have
a conference call scheduled with him soon and certainly
intend
pushing on exactly the issues you've identified. I hope
others
are planning to do the same.
_________________________________________
Kathleen Folger, Electronic Resources Officer
University of Michigan University Library
209 Hatcher Graduate Library Email: kfolger umich.edu
University of Michigan Phone
734.764.9375
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1205 Fax
734.764.0259
________________________________
[mailto:owner-liblicense-llists.yale.edu] On Behalf
Of Jim Stemper
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 10:19 PM
To: liblicense-llists.yale.edu
Subject: Re: DRM at SAE Publication Board meeting
It's great that SAE appears to be listening to the concerns
of
faculty and librarians, but I don't think we're out of the
woods
just yet... The revised license I've seen still says that we
cannot "transmit electronically, via e-mail or any
other file
transfer protocols, any portion of the Licensed
Products." They
may "technically" remove the DRM restriction, but
doesn't this
wording really retain the same *legal* prohibition on the
practice of "scholarly sharing," i.e. emailing
tech reports to
colleagues in a work group? The revised license also retains
the
recent prohibition on walk-in users, revoking a right
commonly
granted to land-grant universities in earlier iterations of
the
license. Another big concern is that the "pay $X per
download"
pricing model remains -- in the absence of usage statistics
from
SAE, it's much too easy to run out of downloads in the
middle of
a budget year. Is no one else pushing back on this stuff?
Sounds
like this one needs a little more time in the oven.
Jim Stemper Electronic Resources Librarian
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
***
At 11:01 PM 4/25/2007 From: Ann Okerson
To: liblicense-llists.yale.edu
Subject: DRM at SAE Publication Board meeting
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:31:33
The SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers International)
access
and licensing arrangements have been discussed on several
lists
and some of you have seen those messages, along with the
voluble
protests from the library community. Our Engineering
Librarian
forwarded me today the message below, which signals that
librarians can have an impact on problematic publisher
licenses;
And that publishers do listen. Ann Okerson
[SNIP]
|
