Two giants in the library technology market move the battle over who controls library catalog records to court.
The AUPresses Library Relations Committee asks Peter Berkery and Mary Lee Kennedy to share their thoughts about how relations between publishers and libraries have changed.
Susie Winter reviews recent data on cybersecurity for academic libraries, as well as a survey of awareness and attitudes toward best practices among librarians.
Robert Harington reports on the recent SSP Publisher-Funder Task Force closed forum of funders, publishers, librarians and academics, who met to discuss how collaboration among stakeholder groups may accelerate a transition to open research.
Are libraries “neutral”? That question is way too simplistic to serve as anything other than a political football.
There is value in exploring the concept of different perspectives on open access in order to begin to develop a “unified approach to open”.
Members of the OCLC Research Team discuss their project examining changes to library work, collections, and engagement experiences and how they will lead to the future of libraries.
Robert Harington interviews a number of experts with a few burning questions on the Subscribe to Open (S2O) model in a two part post, part two appearing here.
Robert Harington interviews a number of experts with a few burning questions on the Subscribe to Open (S2O) model in a two part post, part one appearing here:
Robert Harington argues that funders, be they national, or private, should consider directly funding their field through funding societies and institutions, with a focus on equitable distribution of funds across scholarly communities.
Robert Harington asks how scholarly societies are coping as the global coronavirus pandemic continues to cast a shadow, certainly well into 2021 and very likely into 2022 and beyond?
Library budgets shrank for 2 decades. They can’t shrink any further because of COVID-19. In fact, they should grow despite contracting college budgets
Is copyright infringement malum prohibitum (wrong only because it’s prohibited) or malum in se (morally wrong in and of itself)? Interestingly, scholcomm commentators and legal reference materials often characterize it as the former–while both statute and case law treat it like the latter, classifying it as “property theft” and regularly awarding its victims both statutory and punitive damages.
In this update, the focus shifts to the value journal publishers offer, and who benefits.
Popular opinion to the contrary, scholarly publishing has not been disrupted. But only superior management can navigate the many challenges ahead.