From: Fred Jenkins <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:42:37 -0500

I thought he was questioning the sanity of the Justice Department, not
Berkeley.

Fred W. Jenkins, Ph.D.
Associate Dean for Collections and Operations, University Libraries
Professor, University Libraries and Department of Religious Studies
University of Dayton



On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:06 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Richard James <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 09:34:17 -0500
>
> It's entirely sane. UC had the option of making the content compliant, which would require a substantial infusion of resources, or removing it from public access, which would cost significantly less. Given those two choices the outcome was entirely reasonable.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 11:59 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> From: Richard Gottlieb <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 10:41:54 -0500
>>
>> This is insane
>> Richard Gottlieb
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 01:05:16 -0500
>>
>> Of possible interest:
>>
>> "The University of California, Berkeley, will cut off public access to
>> tens of thousands of video lectures and podcasts in response to a U.S.
>> Justice Department order that it make the educational content
>> accessible to people with disabilities."
>>
>> https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/06/u-california-berkeley-delete-publicly-available-educational-content#.WL0t2FiZT-k.twitter