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

Fri Aug 1 11:59:14 EDT 2014

Hi Rogan,

Exactly - I'm not sure if there is or should be a concern, but would be interested if EU or Canadian Copyright laws, e.g., might introduce liabilities.
I think not, but in the spirit of information gathering.

Cheers!
Ben

On Aug 1, 2014, at 7:13 AM, Rogan Hamby <rogan.hamby at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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