Mulcahy described in detail the specifics about HathiTrust.
HathiTrust was founded in 2008, the intent was and is to create a shared digital repository, owned and governed by partners. Currently there are over 60 partners, including consortia, US research libraries and one foreign member. The philosophy is to open up materials as far as legally possible.
As of 01/2012, Hathi includes 10,000,000+ volumes with 2,700,000 public domain texts. Over 70% of all volumes are in non-English languages. Approximately 70% of public domain volumes are in languages other than English.
Material is drawn from the Google digitization project, defunct Microsoft project, Internet Archive and the partners. Hathi is encouraging library partners to digitize and add material. There are possibilities of collaboration with other libraries. Partners and non-partners can create theme collections.
There are two types of partnerships, a content providing partnership and sustaining partnership.
Mulcahy reported that the advantages for RUL to join are: participating in steps toward a national digital library, a national shared preservation program and the prestige to participate with peer and aspirant institutions. Mulcahy mentioned that it would be institutional "good citizenship" and also gives RUL the opportunity to collaborate among partners in governance and to determine Hathi's future direction.
Among the partners there are working groups looking at topics such as storage expansion needs, discovery, faculty research, ingest and error rates, collection development and management.
Pilch discussed the legal concerns related to becoming a HathiTrust member. In addition to the Google lawsuit, HathiTrust is facing a lawsuit. Each pertains to the use of material in copyright. Much of the HathiTrust material was part of the Google project. Concerns are related to the lawfulness of the copies and to reproduction, public display and public distribution of those copies, and extend even to storage of the materials. There are additional questions concerning use of works identified as orphans in the Orphan Works project.
Pilch discussed Hathi's procedures for due diligence when determining copyright status and use of works that fall into copyright exceptions, mainly Section 107 and 108. HathiTrusts' application of the 108 provision restricting digital copies to library premises is not completely clear. Pilch also explained the issues related to rights statements and raised questions on how they will be interpreted.
All in all, the recommendations were to pursue partnership in HathiTrust but delay in order to:
A discussion ensued and it was recommended that selectors perform searches in Hathi in their areas to see what is available and to comment on the platform.
Denda asked if it was known what and how many positions were required to maintain and participate in a Hathi partnership at a given institution.
Smulewitz asked if any of the participating institutions were interviewed regarding their thoughts on the pending lawsuits, especially those libraries that have joined since the lawsuits were filed.
Weber and Smulewitz were asked to contact members that they know in other institutions to learn of their experiences as members.
The group will report back at the March meeting and make a recommendation to LRC.
The report will be posted on CSC and the LRC Sakai site.
Hartman presented the Managing Vendor Contacts document prepared by Izbicki. A question was asked about filling out a vendor form to establish new vendors in the ILS for the purpose of acquiring tax information for the Budget Office. Denda mentioned that it would be difficult to determine if the vendor was not already in the ILS system. Weber offered that it was not mandatory to fill out the form and that if it wasn't filled out CTS would be checking the vendor status when an order was received.
The Managing Vendor Contacts document will be placed on the Sakai site and will be brought back to LRC to be discussed when Izbicki is present.
The Last Copy Policy document was also discussed and a suggestion for minor change of a single word was made. Discussion ensued about the interpretation of the document. The document will also be brought back to the next LRC meeting to be discussed.
The Holdings Management Team is working on the Douglass periodicals weeding and consolidation project. A comprehensive list was created of all periodical titles held at Douglass. It included holdings from other RUL libraries for the same titles. All records were searched for duplicate records of the same title. The list, in spreadsheet format, was annotated with notes pertaining to holdings and other findings. The list has been distributed to all libraries that have holdings for validation. Five libraries have completed the validation of their holdings.
The list was sorted so that titles only held by Douglass were isolated and given to Denda who shared with Oswell. Both made recommendations on the Douglass only titles. In some cases it was recommended to offer the titles to other libraries. LRC members agreed that if no library wants to include last copies of any periodical title, the title should be transferred to the Annex.
The Coutts Math and Computer Science PDA managed by Mei Ling Lo have ended. Mei Ling had preselected the titles that were loaded into the catalog. All titles with one or two uses were removed. Reports on usage and purchases will be forthcoming.
Sterback and Weber are chairing the Catalog Committee for the UMDNJ/RWJ merger. UMDNJ reported that all holdings are cataloged.
We are starting the first phase of the larger Coutts PDA. 6,000 records were loaded.
Pilch is developing a framework for digitization and will educate on third party works.
Still reported that Gary Golden has returned as Director at Robeson Library and therefore Vibiana Cvetkovic has stepped down.
Next Meeting: February 16, 2012
9:30am - 11:30am
University Conference Room, Alexander Library, CAC