Comments on: Deep Links and Commercial Use of Content

By: Richard Padley

Richard Padley — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 15:02:15 +0000

Phew. I thought I was hallucinating when I originally read this, but now it seems the world is that strange after all.

Perhaps this is an attempt to enforce a new type of business model based on redefining the notion of a hyperlink. If you use a DeepLink ™ then you’ll have to pay more?

Perhaps this should be patented … however I’m not sure if BT still have prior art though.

By: David Smith

David Smith — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 12:34:10 +0000

Thank God I’m not the only one. My reading was also that HBP were of the opinion that you could find stuff and use it but actually not tell anybody about it (which really is what a link ultimately is). They seem to have decided that reproducing a thing is exactly the same as telling people where a thing is. I was trying to work out how they could let Ebsco put this stuff in their platform given the last bit of their licence “…this content may not be used in electronic reserves…” (Yeah – I know I’m twisting it somewhat )

If I was a library, replacing the direct links with the specific search queries that get you to the same basic place would be exactly what I would do. I’m curious as to how HBP can cut off access to all at an institution given that their own licence specifically allows for discovery based usage, is their plan to punish their paying customers?

By: Eric Hellman

Eric Hellman — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:25:05 +0000

In the words of John MacEnroe, “YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS!!!”

Perhaps the libraries should charge HBP for citations that their faculty members make to articles in HBP publications.

By: Michael Clarke

Michael Clarke — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:23:41 +0000

I am trying to get my head around HBP’s business rules. Let me see if I have this straight:
1. Libraries pay for access to HBP content
2. It is not OK for anyone at the library or university to link to the content they have paid for.

And what does “deep linking” even mean? Linking to an article? Isn’t that also known by the term “linking?” What are people supposed to do: “Hey, check out this great article. Follow this link to the home page and search for it.”

Why wouldn’t HBP simply sell institutional access and price accordingly instead of inflicting bizarre linking policies on their customers? If you have access, you have access. Members of the institution can link to the home page, the table of contents, any given article, or their copy of The HBP Business Rules Deciphered! the latest cryptographic thriller by Dan Brown.

By: Dan Lee

Dan Lee — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:00:11 +0000

I haven’t read the Flegg piece yet, so the story may be different than I am supposing. But there is nothing free about the copies available in EbscoHost. Libraries pay Ebsco for access for their community to the materials Ebsco has aggregated from others. HBP gets a piece of that as well as the other publishers.

What does HBP think university libraries are paying for? Universities are educational institutions. People teach and take classes. If these materials weren’t used in classes, libraries probably wouldn’t be paying for it. Call it “course packs” or anything you like, it is how scholarly material is used on campus.

From a copyright perspective, the rights of reproduction and distribution are implicated. There isn’t a separate course pack right or right to distribute through faculty.

By: Jill O'Neill

Jill O'Neill — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:31:14 +0000

It’s the enforcement in selected cases that I find troubling. Either you think it is wrong of the libraries to do this in any instance or you don’t. Picking and choosing on the basis of whether you think there’s too great a sum of money at stake is problematic. Fish or cut bait.