Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 21:39:54 -0400

I was just referring, a little tongue in cheek, to your last paragraph about
the impossibility of controlling the behavior of 35,000 users, and giving this
as one example of a behavior that would be well nigh impossible to control.
Sorry if that didn't come across in the way I intended it.

Sandy

On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 05:09 PM LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>From: Peggy E Hoon <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 14:40:27 +0000
>
>I’m sorry, Sandy, I’m not following you.  The behavior you reference, in
>addition to not being allowed within any terms and conditions I have seen,
>would also be a violation of our Computer Use policy.  Again, I cannot
>‘promise’ or ‘ensure’ - ahead of time, that any individual *will not*
do
>that but I can, and certainly would strongly discourage it as a license
>violation and respond immediately should we become aware of it.  I am not
>aware of anyone at LSU doing this but, I can assure you, that both the LSU
>Libraries and LSU IT Security would jump on that behavior, not only for the
>reasons I have said above, but also it poses a potential security breach
>into the LSU systems.
>
>If I have missed your point, my apologies.  We pay millions and millions of
>dollars a year to subscribe to our licensed resources and we/I have pretty
>strong feelings about that being misused as you have described and
>jeopardizing access for the rest of our Authorized Users.
>
>Please let me know, either on list or off, if I have misunderstood your
>comment and/or how I might provide any further clarification.
>
>Best,
>Peggy
>
>
>From: SANFORD G THATCHER <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 11:46:41 -0400
>
>Behavior such as faculty members giving their access codes to Sci-Hub? :)
>
>
>On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 04:27 AM LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>From: Peggy E Hoon <[log in to unmask]>
>>Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 17:10:23 +0000
>>
>>Completely agree with Cindy – in these licenses, you are the lending
>>library.  As Cindy says, the CONTU Guidelines applied to borrowing
>>libraries since it was a way – deemed reasonable in 1978 based on the
>>environment, practices, journal price and market, library budgets, etc., in
>>existence in the mid-1970s – to interpret what might trigger the ‘need’,
>>under Section 108, to subscribe based on the amount of the journal you were
>>using.  CONTU was trying to put numbers on what constituted a substitute
>>for a subscription in 1978, which, btw, was 40 years ago, is not the law,
>>was not intended as a hard and fast rule, and was supposed to evolve as the
>>environment evolved.   As a lending library, you cannot possibly know or
>>monitor what a borrowing library is or is not doing with respect to either
>>Section 108 or its 1978 interpretation, aka CONTU.  Putting that in a
>>license amounts to essentially throw-away language since a lending library
>>does not have the obligation, under the law or any guidelines, or the
>>ability to monitor or control what a borrowing library does.  As Cindy and
>>others recommend, it really makes no sense to have it there because it
>>doesn’t do anything.
>>
>>An analogy would be when a license attempts to require the institution to
>>“warrant” or “ensure” or “promise” that its users (in our case,
>35,000)
>>will/shall abide by the terms and conditions of the license.  Really?  So
>>far, neither I nor any of the Vendors I have asked point blank, have been
>>able to tell me one single thing the institution can do to prospectively
>>control the behavior of my 35,000 users.  Nada.  I can use reasonable
>>measure to control access, to inform them of T&Cs and to respond to
>>perceived situations but I cannot promise or warrant their behavior.  So,
>>don’t do it.
>>
>>Best,
>>Peggy
>>
>>*Peggy E. Hoon, J.D.*
>>
>>Director of Copyright Policy and Education
>>LSU Libraries
>>Louisiana State University
>>295 Middleton Library, Baton Rouge, LA  70803
>>office 225-578-2218 | fax 225-578-6825
>>lsu.edu <http://www.lsu.edu/>
>>
>>From: "KRISTOF, CYNTHIA" <[log in to unmask]>
>>Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2018 22:20:58 +0000
>>
>>Because CONTU is a set of guidelines with activities (such as tracking)
>>that concern the borrowing library. The lending library has a couple duties
>>in CONTU, too, but the weight is largely on the borrowing library. As you
>>know ILL sections of licences concern what libraries can do as lenders.
>>However, we can't control what the borrowing libraries do regarding CONTU
>>tracking... therefore, it's largely absurd to agree to it in a license and
>>potentially trouble. I know the potential trouble part is probably a long
>>shot. I just got done vacuuming, so I'm kind of wiped out, and this
>>probably isn't the best explanation!
>>
>>Maybe others can add to this? I hope this helps.