From: Joanne Romano <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 09:21:23 -0600

I agree, David.  And there is no standardization amongst publishers
for what is defined as "normal" and what is defined as "excessive".

Joanne

Joanne V. Romano, MLS
Head of Resource Management

Texas Medical Center Library
1133 John Freeman Blvd.
Houston, TX 77030
[log in to unmask]



On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 9:57 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: David Prosser <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 11:43:52 +0000
>
> Unfortunately, this method of looking for triggers above ‘normal’
> usage massively inhibits text and data mining.  We are in an era where
> ‘normal’ and ‘excessive’ need to be redefined.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> On 17 Feb 2016, at 02:18, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: "Maher, Stephen" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 16:21:16 +0000
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> In my experience publishers monitor the rate of downloading from an
> institution’s IPs. If the rate exceeds “normal” usage, the publisher
> notifies the institution with information of when the excessive
> downloading occurred and over which IPs. More often than not the
> excessive downloading occurs over the IP address connected to an
> institution’s proxy server. The institution then attempts to identify
> the username(s) associated with the downloads and temporarily suspends
> it.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Stephen
> Stephen Maher, MSIS
> NYU Health Sciences Library