[Table of Contents] [Search]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Old-Fashioned Definition of "Wrong" (was Mr. Smiley's lawyer)



But, if they are working with 20th century materials, they almost always would need the permission of the copyright holder, and almost always it would be refused. I doubt that Stephen Joyce would allow the digitization of his grandfather's letters, which are heavily used through all holding repositiories.


---Shelley Cox
Emerita, SIUC
----- Original Message ----- From: "s cheiner" <drscheiner@YAHOO.COM>
To: <EXLIBRIS@MAIL.ECW.NAME>
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: [EXLIBRIS] Old-Fashioned Definition of "Wrong" (was Mr. Smiley's lawyer)



I am not sure mass digitization is so impossible if
the international library community is involved.
Gates/Google et al want to do this as a commercial
venture. We already have had list members give links
to outstanding digital libraries that are accessible
on-line. The Gutenberg project has word processed the
texts of many books - some rare or scarce.
A complete, central registry of digitized books is a
first step. Patrons can be made to pay for the
digitizing. When in the past I ordered microfilm from
the British Library I paid one fee if the book had
already been copied onto a master microfilm and a
higher fee if it had not.
The most  fragile items can be digitized using a
digital camera, which I find much faster than
scanning.
The question is, are libraries willing to do this,
even if they receive a royalty  each time an item they
digitized is used? Every journey starts with a single
step, and a single step by 100,000 libraries adds up
to a considerable distance.
C.J. Scheiner


--- Edward Levin <edwardlevin@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
Very few (if any) libraries have the financial
resources to scan or
microfiche all of their rare materials, if indeed
this could even be done
without risking damage to their more fragile
materials.

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com


-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.4/449 - Release Date: 9/15/2006




[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]

 [CoOL]