Big Deals Now widespread, flexible and sticky But price pressure is relentless And much material is unused: Spanish research consortium Spanish research consortium OhioLink OhioLink
Journal usage “Most articles are read only by the author and their mother” True or false? Research sends mixed messages 45%-73% of titles unused BUT rational use of document supply more difficult because of pricing
E books A ‘killer app’ – a long time coming. Still a niche market BUT mass digitisation
Mass digitisation of books 55 million books 1 million every year (OCLC) Project Gutenberg – 17,000 Microsoft - 100,000 from BL Open Content Alliance – 150,000 Google – 10 million? OCLC’s NetLibrary – 100,000 Marketing and readership? A small study – BLDSC non current books
Retrospective conversion 250,000 serial titles Started with JSTOR Elsevier -2000 BUT pace is accelerating – Springer, Sage, OUP etc Researchers’ attitudes Impact on library budgets
Document suppliers British Library: mixed experience in last 5 years INIST – French only except Articlescience SUBITO – Legal saga CISTI – No obvious way to search for articles without registering INFOTRIEVE – Commercial and innovative Publishers – PPV Google and Google Scholar
Performance – an amateur’s experience Articles by Mike McGrath in Interlending & Document Supply (19) BL = one – on vacuum pumps INIST = three CISTI = none SUBITO – no article search engine INFOTRIEVE = 2001 profile in DSC news - for US$22! GoogleScholar – 19 hits – all articles captured and easy to use – and most available via BL Direct! (But not direct from BL site!)
Copyright and DRM EU ‘harmonisation’ of copyright law Significant shift of power towards the publishers using DRM.
Open Access The elephant in the library Caution needed as emotions are high Majority of authors are hostile to OA – true or false? UK government policy BUT RCUK, Wellcome and JISC are requiring deposit from Autumn 2006. BUT using the ‘author pays’ model
Costs Lack of understanding about when document supply should be used Peter Shepherd – COUNTER – compares the average cost of article with the cost of DS. Cost of low use articles is relevant to DS
SUNCAT A union catalogue for the UK holdings of serials History of failed projects Hats off to EDINA 90% coverage achieved – 98%? envisaged
Two failures Docusend – An attempt at a one stop shop for document supply. Technology and cost appear to be the main reasons for failure Monograph interlending – failed on cost?
Resource sharing – public libraries Long history of disunity (1993-) LASER, WALES and East Midlands versus the rest OCLC bought Viscount – possibility of unity re established Not to be. OCLC won the Combined regions tender and TALIS are going it alone. Different business models OCLC has 75% and TALIS 25% Future unclear.