I admire Brewster Kahle, and I and my company have contributed to the IA’s book efforts before, but this project is a violation of copyright and a danger to writers’ already tenuous ability to make ends meet.https://nyti.ms/2WX8A82
There's been no attempt to verify or even estimate exactly how many extant, unreachable physical copies in brick-and-mortar libraries "represents" and reduce waitlists accordingly, waitlists have just been abolished in favor of infinite simultaneous copies
-
-
I can refute this part because I authorized my staff to share our exact record set to match what we could be offering in CDL. OTOH, that has nothing to do with the IA deciding on its own to forgo waitlists during this emergency period.
-
I meant that IA's Emergency Library, in particular, made no such attempt, I wasn't trying to speak generally
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
at least for WorldCat member libraries this is trivially available information, e.g. 203 copies of this book: https://www.worldcat.org/title/cascade-experiment-selected-poems/oclc/727815210&referer=brief_results …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
More fundamentally, the notion that, if a library owns a physical copy, a digital copy can be loaned, is nonsense. Copyright is the right to control the production of copies. The buyer has first-sale rights, not some attendant right to make and lend copies in another medium.
-
It isn’t nonsense in a 1:1 CDL context, or in the context of full accessibility of content. I get that this decision, if made permanent, is a significant challenge to copyright. But going down the list of legal questions in the context of this emergency, accessibility is key.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.