ALA 2010: At SPARC-ACRL Forum, Catching Up on Cases and Legislation

You know a session must have something to offer when it takes precedence over the World Cup: In a session punctuated by cheers from soccer fans in the hallway outside, academic librarians attending the American Library Association Annual Conference got an update on the major issues before the profession June 26 at the SPARC-ACRL forum.

SPARC's Heather Joseph introduced the agenda, which included brief updates on the major court cases and legislation that stand to influence the scholarly dissemination of knowledge as well as the day-to-day administration of the academic library.

Univ. of California v. NPG
First, Joseph introduced Brian Schottlaender, University Librarian at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), to give his first-hand take on the stand-off between the University of California system and Nature Publishing Group (NPG). (Schottlaender was among the three signatories on the letter to UC's faculty that sparked the controversy.)

Schottlaender gave background on the issue (summarized by LJ here), and reiterated the hardships faced by the UC system that he says forced the libraries' hands. The UC system is attempting to trim journals spending by 15%, he said, adding that NPG's price increase would essentially eliminate that saving.

He then rebutted a few points NPG has made in the dispute. For example, he acknowledged that UC's discount off of list price is "a respectable one," but asked, "who pays list?" He also took the opportunity to say unequivocally that the libraries had not proposed the boycott mentioned in the letter, but that it was rather a faculty-led response.

Still, while Schottlaender maintained that all "look forward to resuming our negotiations," he made the libraries' postion clear: barring compromise, UC "would have to consider canceling some or all of our subscriptions to NPG journals."

Later, asked whether he knew of similar situations at other schools, Schottlaender cited confidentiality clauses, saying "literally, we are unaware." However, one audience member from another research institution in the Southeast confirmed that his own university had recently been involved in similar negotiations with NPG.

Waiting on judgement
Next, Duke University scholarly communication officer Kevin Smith began with a very short status update on the suit brought by Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, and Sage Publications against four individuals at Georgia State University (GSU), Atlanta: "Nothing has happened."

"But," he added, "I never give a short update."

The case (as recounted by Publishers Weekly) currently sits with a federak judge, who has been asked by both sides to issue a summary judgment. Smith noted that the case is proceeding in the usual way for a civil trial, but added that "the vitriol is a little bit unusual in these pleadings, I think."

What has everyone on edge are the potential ramifications of a ruling in favor of either side. A judgment imposing an injunction on GSU could force libraries across the country to reexamine their own practices and take a more conservative approach to licensing materials through intermediaries like the Copyright Clearance Center.

If the court favors GSU's revised approach to e-reserves, most schools would be able to conduct business as usual, making their own judgements about fair use in consultation with tools like the Fair Use Check List.

The judge could also reject both motions for summary judgement and force the case to trial. When asked whether he expected a conclusion to come soon, Smith noted that an appeal would automatically be granted no matter what the outcome.

"It's going to be a while," he said, though a last-minute out-of-court settlement also remains at least a possibility.

In the end, "whichever way this case comes out," Smith said, "it's going to make a huge difference for the environment of scholarly communications."

Open Access for the little guys
Adding a liberal arts perspective to the discussion, Jonathan Miller, director of the Olin Library at Rollins College (FL), gave some of the background behind the Rollins Arts & Science faculty's recent Open Access resolution, among the first in the country from a college.

Open Access is not just for "for the big guys, the big research universities," Miller said. Small colleges are net information consumers, with students and faculty members who make "a little use of a broad range of resources." There's no way for a small college library to collect everything that may be neccessary, so alternative means of access to current scholarship are a welcome addition.

Meanwhile, in terms of their own research efforts, the Rollins faculty concluded, "if we're going to use OA resources, shouldn't we be making our own contribution?"

Miller also emphasized the collaborative and politial elements of local and regional Open Access advocacy and touted the importance of identifying faculty champions on campus to champion the message. (For more, see Miller's notes from the talk.)

FRPAA update
Finally, Joseph stepped in for an absent member of Senator John Cornyn's (R-TX) staff to give an update on the progess of FRPAA, or the Federal Research Public Access Act (see this summary from its reintroduction to the Senate).

The Senate bill currently resides with the Committee on Homeland Security, headed by Senate co-sponsor Joseph Lieberman (I-CT). According to Joseph, the Senate is waiting and watching to see what comes of the bill's introduction in the House.

There, on April 15 a companion House bill was introduced by Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA), along with a number of bipartisan co-sponsors, and has since been referred to the Committee on Oversight and Governmental Reform.

While the FRPAA bills stand with their respective committees, another bill with portions exhibiting almost identical language has moved through the House and is set to be introduced into the Senate: the reauthorization of the America COMPETES Act. The bill aims to give the U.S. a competitive edge by improving science, technology, engineering and math education.

One provision of the reathorization would create an Interagency Public Access Committee, which would "establish priorities for coordinating the development of any Federal science agency policies related to public access to the results of federally funded research."

The bill also would require a report to Congress describing the status of all policies governing public access to federally funded research from institutions with extramural budgets of more than $100,000,000, thus mirroring the definitions that appear in FRPAA.

As Joseph put it, "the action is hot and heavy on public access right now in both chambers of Congress."