LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date:
Tue, 10 Jan 2012 18:31:56 -0500
Reply-To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: e-reserves, supplemental or required?
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines) 
From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:33:45 -0600

I am curious how many librarians today think that e-reserves are
limited to just "supplemental" readings. As I understand it, the
Georgia State e-reserves case involves materials that were not just
assigned as supplemental readings. And were even traditional print
reserves limited to supplemental readings only?

Sandy Thatcher



> From: "Elizabeth E. Kirk" <[log in to unmask]>
>
> How about the obvious... No one is talking about course packs here
> (except the excerpted language from the Harvard Business School Press
> (HBSP) terms), as librarians are quite aware that these are a whole
> different legal animal from reserves, which are supplemental, not
> required, readings.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2