1. The committee recapped the June 16 meeting.
2. The draft RU Core policy was reviewed and small revisions were suggested. The policy will be brought to the Library Resources Council for further discussion.
3. Ryan distributed samples from scholarly communication websites of other AAU universities. Discussion ensued on the form and content of the RUL Scholarly Communication website. Some principles agreed on were that the site should include content on both Open Access and Scholarly Communication and that the front page should be to-the-point and accessible, with detailed content on subpages. Jim, Triveni, and Ryan will work on preparing content for the initial release of the page, and input will be sought from faculty members and other constituencies. A revised scholarly communication page would be a starting point for informing and involving key faculty groups like the Faculty Councils and Senate. We would also like to promote faculty initiatives like the Harvard resolution on Open Access.
4. Following up on the June CDC meeting, the group discussed the possibility of outreach to the faculty on copyright relevant to classroom instruction. Jeanne informed the group that although the ARL information package on teaching rights is ready to distribute, Rutgers does not have any mechanism in place to answer copyright questions, and is not prepared to issue guidance on any of the grey areas that may arise. Elizabeth Minot and Rebecca Pressman are interested in working on this, with the possibility of a pilot education program in Newark. However, we would not be ready for a mass education campaign until questions about interpreting copyright rules could be resolved within the University. Unresolved issues include the fact that Rutgers has not qualified for the TeachAct protections from financial damage in distance education copyright. Rutgers must have a large-scale copyright education campaign and ensure that downstream copies of materials can be made within legal bounds. These are the type of issues that a Copyright/Scholarly Communication Librarian could help resolve.
5. The group discussed future issues the committee may address including the development of workflows for processing significant special collections holdings into RUcore, processing for digital preservation, and subsidizing author submission/publication fees.