From: "Friend, Fred" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 10:37:09 +0000

Obtaining reasonable perpetual access to journal backfiles was a
battle the library community lost almost twenty years ago. It was part
of the disastrous (for library users and librarians) switch from a
content purchasing model to a content licensing model. For all
licensed content we are totally dependent upon what the publisher will
allow, and of course there is no uniform approach to such issues as
perpetual access amongst publishers.

The only way to cut through this Gordian Knot is for the academic
community to re-take control over its own work, which researchers can
do by refusing to sign over all rights to publishers and by placing
the peer-reviewed author's final version in an open access repository.
Open access repositories do not charge for perpetual access, nor do
they require you to spend many hours negotiating the rights to
perpetual access. We may have lost the battle for unfettered perpetual
access to licensed content but future arrangements for access to
taxpayer-funded research outputs are in our hands.

Fred Friend
Honorary Director Scholarly Communication UCL
________________________________________

From: Chris Bulock <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 09:55:56 -0500

Hello Michele,

I might say that there is too much variation in perpetual access clauses to
declare an "industry standard." I've read through the perpetual access
clauses in all of our licenses, and it seems no two are alike.  A provision
like the one you mention is fairly common in our agreements though. Most
vendors are (understandably) hesitant to agree to provide a service in
perpetuity without sometime of optional exit. Aside from providing a copy or
providing access through a third party (as was offered in your agreement),
I've also seen agreements that state they could charge a fee (sometimes
specified, sometimes not) for access after a certain number of years.

Chris Bulock
Electronic Resources Librarian
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----

From: "Shipley, Michele" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 16:10:50 -0400

I have a question about what other libraries consider to be acceptable
language in a license agreement covering perpetual access to electronic
journal backfiles purchased by the library. Miner Library recently purchased
electronic backfiles for several important journals from a major vendor.
This was a one-time purchase; Miner now "owns"
the backfiles. However the license agreement for the backfiles states that
the vendor may decide to stop providing access to the backfiles with a 30
day notice. In the event the vendor stops providing access to the backfiles
they will provide an electronic copy to Miner or, if they choose, make the
backfiles available through Portico or CLOCKSS.
We are being told that this is the industry standard.

Has anyone else run into language like this and been able to negotiate a
better guarantee of perpetual access? Is this language really the industry
standard?

Thanks for your help. Michele

Michele Shipley, MLS
Assistant Director of Digital & Branch Libraries Edward G. Miner Library
University of Rochester Medical Center Rochester, NY 14642
[log in to unmask]