[Eg-oversight-board] Information for requesting SFC review of sharing OCLC MARC records

Fri Aug 1 10:13:55 EDT 2014

That brings up an interesting question.  If there is a concern specific to
international scope what is is that concern and what are the associated
liabilities?

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Ben Hyman <ben.hyman at bc.libraries.coop>
wrote:

> SFC's perspective, particularly given the international nature of the EG
> community will be valuable. We have other board business to engage SFC on,
> so can add this to the list. Other thoughts before we do?
>
> Sent by phone. Please pardon my thumbs.
>
> On Jul 31, 2014, at 5:52 PM, Rogan Hamby <rogan.hamby at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well, I fully support the SFC looking at it and giving us their opinion.
>  I've never been shy with my opinion nor will I be now.
>
> The most conservative route is to get a license, from owning record
> libraries.  With that said I've never been inclined to the most
> conservative route.  I do think Roy Tennant's statement, especially if it's
> never been countermanded by others at OCLC (I haven't searched to see if it
> has) would be pretty darn good in court to at least extradite ourselves
> from trouble.  And I am inclined to believe that is the current status of
> OCLC.  That goes a long way.
>
> Will it always be so in the future?  Who knows.  That's why the most
> conservative route is to go with the copyright holders granting use rights.
>  Still, I'm of the camp that doesn't think (at least under US law) that bib
> records are copyrightable anyway so I say download and use them.
>
> (apologies to Yamil for the dupe, I accidentally sent this to him instead
> of everyone)
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Yamil Suarez <ysuarez at berklee.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Here is a summary of the main bits of information I have so far
>> compiled about the legality of sharing OCLC MARC records within the Eg
>> green community. Others may have additional information on comments on
>> the matter. Several in the EG community feel that we should be in the
>> clear in sharing OCLC records based on current OCLC policy, even
>> between organizations that are not OCLC members for the sake of
>> improving Evergreen. Though many of us would feel better having the
>> SFC look into this for us.
>>
>>
>>
>> Background:
>>
>> Some EG community members would like to make EG handle RDA style MARC
>> records better. OCLC has high quality RDA MARC records that we would
>> like to share between community members and make part of a common test
>> data set.
>>
>>
>> OCLC information on the use of their records:
>>
>> A) Letter from OCLC employee, Roy Tennant, to public mailing list
>>
>> https://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1404&L=CODE4LIB&F=&S=&P=227426
>>
>> "...
>> Subject: Re: barriers to open metadata?
>> From: Roy Tennant <[log in to unmask]>
>> Reply-To: Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 20:37:00 -0700
>>
>> > This has now instead become a reasonable recommendation
>> > concerning ODC-BY licensing [3] but the confusion and uncertainty
>> > about which records an OCLC member may redistribute remains.
>> >
>> > [3] http://www.oclc.org/news/releases/2012/201248.en.html
>>
>> Allow me to try to put this confusion and uncertainty to rest once and
>> for all:
>>
>> ALL THE THINGS. ALL.
>>
>> At least as far as we are concerned. I think it's well past time to put
>> the
>> past in the past.
>>
>> Meanwhile, we have just put nearly 200 million works records up as linked
>> open data. [1], [2], [3]. If that doesn't rock the library open linked
>> data
>> world, then no one is paying attention.
>>
>> Roy
>>
>> [1] http://oclc.org/en-US/news/releases/2014/201414dublin.html
>> [2]
>> http://dataliberate.com/2014/04/worldcat-works-197-million-nuggets-of-linked-data/
>> [3] http://hangingtogether.org/?p=3811
>>
>>
>> ..."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> B) Question I posed to OCLC support and their answer
>>
>> "...Hello, I am the system administrator of the Berklee College of
>> Music library (OCLC symbol: BKC). We use the Evergreen open-source
>> ILS, and I am actively participating in helping make Evergreen work
>> with RDA. When collaborating with other Evergreen developers on
>> Evergreen RDA bugs, I often refer to how my OCLC RDA MARC records look
>> on my system, but it would be great if I could share a few OCLC RDA
>> records with fellow developers so they could test them on their own
>> test servers with the same MARC RDA data.
>>
>> Up to this point I have assumed I could never share records that
>> Berklee has received from OCLC with other institutions. I wanted to
>> finally confirm if I was being overtly cautious, or in fact following
>> OCLC's wishes.  I recently was told of the following post by an OCLC
>> employee, which makes it looks that some OCLC records can be shared.
>> Though I cannot assume this applies to MARC RDA records that we get
>> through the Connexion service.
>> https://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1404&L=CODE4LIB&F=&S=&P=227426
>>  Again for the record, I have not shared any MARC records, and my only
>> interest is to share about a dozen RDA MARC records with fellow
>> Evergreen open-source developers to help the system work with RDA.
>> Thanks in advance, Yamil Suarez..."
>>
>>
>> C) Response from OCLC support
>>
>> "...There is a discussion of WorldCat record use at
>> http://www.oclc.org/worldcat/community/record-use.en.html and the
>> associated links,
>> especially
>> http://www.oclc.org/worldcat/community/record-use/policy/questions.en.html
>> .
>>    If that information and
>> the links don't address your question, please use the email link on
>> that page to email recorduse at oclc.org with further questions. ..."
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure how to best proceed from here on to have the SFC involved.
>> Perhaps we can collectively write a new letter to send to the
>> "recorduse at oclc.org" address I got from OCLC. In this letter we can
>> again restate how we would like to simply use a small number of their
>> records to just help improve EG, and not to become their competitor or
>> to undermine their business model.
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Yamil
>> _______________________________________________
>> eg-oversight-board mailing list
>> eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
>> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eg-oversight-board mailing list
> eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/eg-oversight-board/attachments/20140801/072e2854/attachment.html>