Elsevier’s acquisition of Bepress

Did you miss the big news this past August? This is certainly going to be interesting for many librarians.  Elsevier has acquired bepress.

Casetext releases enhancements to CARA

Casetext has just announced some new enhancements to its product CARA.  CARA allows you to securely upload any brief or memo, and then it searches the universe of federal and state law to find relevant cases you may have missed.

Here is what’s new:

  • Search within results to narrow down your CARA recommendations to those specific to your search terms
  • Jurisdiction filters make sure your results are all in the jurisdictions you care about
  • CARA is getting smarter, so you should expect to see even more relevant CARA result

Check out their website for more information.

HeinOnline added what!?

HeinOnline added 964,179 pages to their products in November 2016.  You can read bout highlights of the new additions at their blog.  You can also check out the entire list of new content.

Webinars provided by Lyrasis

Planning to have a little down time as we wrap up 2016?  Take a look at at the variety of webinars offered by Lyrasis.  Many of them are offered free of charge and with the variety of topics covered, there is sure to be one relevant to you and your library.

 

TR price increase on outside content

Thomson Reuters today announced a price increase on content not included in fixed-rate subscriptions for large and medium law firms.  The increase, effective January 1, 2017, will not affect fixed-rate contract terms.  For details on the rate increase, contact your Thomson Reuters representative or Customer Service.

Ravel Law Announces a New Analytics Product

AALL’s Best New Product of 2016 Winner, Ravel Law, is releasing a new analytics product.  To get all the details and watch a live demonstration with legal tech-blogger Jean O’Grady check their website.

 

EU Decision on E-book Lending

An important EU Court case advances the doctrine of first sale for e-books in the Europe Union:  https://teleread.org/2016/11/14/bill-rosenblatt-inconclusive-ruling-on-library-e-book-lending-in-europe/

Program Manager and Copyright Advisor for Harvard University, Kyle K. Courtney, responded to this recent decision: “Although strictly an EU decision, this could generate some thoughts for our struggles with e-books here in the U.S. Remember, the case comes from the Netherlands, where public libraries are required to pay royalties for the books they lend out as part of a “public lending” right.  These fees are distributed to writers, artists, and publishers via collecting societies. However, this public lending right in the Netherlands did not apply to e-books. Therefore, libraries could only lend out e-books for which they have purchased a license from the publisher.

That’s where we are in the U.S.: We “rent” our e-books. We don’t own them. And when we don’t own them, we lose a lot of use-based options. These e-books are governed by restrictive licensing (truly, it looks a lot like a lease or limited license) that can prevent some of our core practices such as basic loans, interlibrary loan, preservation copies, or even printing for distribution.

This EU decision is hopeful because it suggests that a “dynamic” or “evolving” interpretation of the EU copyright directive should be applied, and that lending of e-books is certainly the modern equivalent of the lending of printed books. That is a big statement! We need something like that here in the U.S. – a fresh reading of the copyright act, especially the first sale doctrine, which is the law that allows libraries to loan print books, as long as they have purchased the work legally.

But our courts, our copyright office, and others have rejected this notion of a “digital first sale” right.  This rejection makes it clear that first sale rights mainly apply to physical, not digital, disposal of copies.

If we can’t have legislation, and we are stuck with licensing, then maybe we can do what the EU court advocated for in its opinion via license: If libraries are purchasing e-books, they need to advocate for clauses in the contract that best serve their mission, their community, and their collection policies. A contract isn’t formalized until it is signed – take the time to try and negotiate. Introduce interlibrary loan clauses, preservation clauses, reject terms that harm collection development goals, or the mission of the libraries.

Perhaps we can learn from this decision on how to advocate for our own U.S.-based e-book purchasing and lending.”

Stay tuned for Kyle’s full analysis in the next issue of CRIV Sheet.