From: Amy Schuler <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:27:46 -0400

This is a very interesting discussion.  Ann, I appreciate your
treatment of the specific issues.  I agree that in regard to point 1,
technical vocabulary, it is incumbent on professional librarians to
have basic understanding of legal contracts.  There are many
informational resources available to help with this - not limited to
the link you provided.  A quick google search reveals many model
contracts and licenses, guides to legal vocabulary, etc.  Many
consortia and library associations are busy creating these guides and
toolkits, usually with the assistance of lawyers (so let's not kill
all of them :))  I would assume that LIS programs also offer courses
that help students learn about legal contracts.

As for point 3, language of the contract, I do not have much to offer,
although I would suspect any initiative here would be backed up (or
lead by?) our friends at IFLA (International Federation of Library
Associations).  Is there a working committee or division at IFLA that
would tackle this?  The creation and ready availability of prepackaged
tools (vocabulary cheat sheets in a variety of  languages, contractual
customs and legal practices in different cultures, etc.) but also
perhaps a committee or group whose purpose would be to help librarians
in need identify other librarians and/or legal experts who could help
with contracts written in x,y,z language.  It could be IFLA or another
international group already has these kinds of assistance available,
but I don't know.    Does anyone else?

Amy Schuler
Director, Information Services and Library
Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies
Millbrook, New York


On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:54 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Ann Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 7:47 PM
>
> The librarians in this course were reacting to several things about
> the NESLI and publishers' licenses (and certainly many others). They
> are by no means alone - I've encountered the problem for years now.
> Here's what concerned them:
>
> (1)  A great deal of "technical" vocabulary (words like breach,
> damages, fair use, warranties, and more; see:
> http://liblicense.crl.edu/resources/licensing-vocabulary/).  Such
> vocabulary is useful and important in a contract, and it pretty much
> has to be learned.  A lot of the meanings become clear in context and
> in negotiations.  Once the definitions are understood, this part of
> the problem concern goes away.  But learn one must.
>
> (2) Arcane writing styles, with many quaint "herewiths" and "hereby"
> to launch clauses and phrases.  And lots of boilerplate that sounds
> like gobbledygook.  We still see a great deal of this, and it's not
> necessary.  Licenses can be written in plain, clear language.  Not all
> legal boilerplate is essential, simply because it's been there for
> some years.  I tell folks in workshops and courses that if they can't
> understand a clause, it could well mean that the clause should be
> written in more straightforward words; they as customers should
> request those clarifications.  I agree with Scott that many
> well-meaning contract lawyers need to revisit their language for
> clarity.
>
> (3) Language of the contract.  This is tough.  The great majority of
> e-resources licenses are written in English, and nearly all the rest
> in other primary western languages.  Now, this poses a real challenge
> for people whose primary language is NOT one of those languages, or
> who are not fluent in same -- which is the case for many in our world.
> This puts people in non-Western countries in a difficult (to
> impossible) situation.  The terms of use they're being asked to agree
> to (or wish to negotiate) may be poorly understood. Many western
> publishers have in-country agents to deal with local librarians, but
> those agents are not so likely to take time to "educate" their
> customers in the nuances of the publishers' contracts, even if the
> agents understand them (which they may not).
>
> What can we do about #3, which is a crucial issue?  Are there any
> publishers who have experience of working in an array of foreign
> languages regarding e-resources contracts?  How do you do it?  Would
> like to hear from you, please.
>
> Thank you, Ann Okerson