eBooks in Illinois Academic Libraries

Outline of a talk made by Tom Peters (tpeters@tapinformation.com) on Monday, March 7, 2005 at the “eBooks in Illinois Academic Libraries” Conference (http://faculty.mckendree.edu/william_harroff/ebe/IAED.htm) in Champaign, Illinois. 

Consortial and Collaborative eBook Programs: 
The
Best of All Possible Worlds


Before we have four grill sessions with specific vendors, let’s discuss the best of all possible consortial ebook programs.

I am making a distinction between consortial and collaborative.  Although both are evident in ebook efforts, on rare occasions consortial ebook programs are not very collaborative, and some collaborative ebook programs are not consortial. 

This is not an exhaustive list. 

A good, fair, reasonable price (of course)

The Pez Theory of Content proposed by Tom Sanville of OhioLink:  Drive down the per-unit cost of digital information, so that users can ingest digital content to their heart’s content

What should be the factors that go into setting the price of an ebook system?

Production and maintenance costs?

Selection or other attempts to predict use?

Actual use of the system?

What is use, anyway?  The manner in which ebooks can be used is quite diverse. 

Whatever the market will bear?

Do consortia focus too much attention on price?

Cost avoidance is one of the few measurable benefits of consortial and collaborative behavior between libraries. 

A good negotiation process

Everyone has all the information they need to make an informed decision

All disagreements (even within the consortium or group of collaborating libraries) are based on accurate and complete information.

A good license agreement

Libraries are not asked to sign away any legal rights they have regarding the content

A good collection

Vendor’s master collection contains lots of compelling content (i.e., content that users really want and need)

Elusive frontlist ebooks, delivered at the same time (or before) the printed edition

Should a consortium allow users access to items in the master collection that have not yet been purchased or leased by the consortium?  EBL can enable up to 10 minutes of use per title free of charge.  Some vendors enable a patron-driven selection model. 

Vendor’s master collection grows at the right pace and in the right directions

Authoritative texts

Quality control problems with some of the texts from the UVA EText Center

Good markup

Some opportunity to select (and deselect) the titles in the collection

Content deals between publishers and vendors should not be the principal driver of the collection that ultimately gets presented to the user.

This places an additional burden on the consortium and its members to make the selected collection worth the resources devoted to the selection process. 

As we move farther into the era of ebooks, how are ebook collections going to be evaluated by libraries, professional associations (e.g., ARL), and accrediting agencies? 

Full text access for all

Nagging questions and concerns about the “snippetization” of some ebook projects, including the Google/Stanford/UMich project. 

FYI, according to the OED, the word “snippet” was first used in 1664. 

No one is denied access to content in the collection

Nothing is ever checked out

This is one of the “natural” affordances of digital content.  The library circulation model of print collections, where the user checks out an available copy and has exclusive use of that copy during the circulation period, attempts to ignore (or deny) this natural affordance. 

Accessible to all

Example:  Mobipocket Reader is wonderful for sighted individuals who want to read their ebooks on PDAs and smartphones, but it is not very accessible to blind or visually impaired individuals who use screen reader software to access ebooks. 

TTS (text to speech software) could be embedded in reader software (e.g., Adobe Reader), in a separate add-on software program (e.g., PDF Aloud), or included in the OS.  It probably would be best to have the TTS engine included in the OS. 

Good administrative module

Examples:  Content Reserve from OverDrive and LibCentral from EBL. 

Usage statistics

Selection processes

Acquisition and Invoicing processes

Good metadata

Just say no to content silos!

This would make a good protest slogan

Ebooks should not be relegated to content silos.  Integrate them with other content and services provided by libraries.  

Lots of functionality for navigating within (and across) ebooks, and for interacting with (and adding value to) ebooks

Annotations that can be saved by the individual reader and shared

This is one way in which use of an ebook collection could actually add value to the collection. 

Variable speed playback for digital audio books

This is one way in which digital content offers an improved experience over analogue content, because with digital you do not get the “chipmunk effect”. 

Usable on all manner of devices

PCs (all operating systems)

Laptops

Tablet PCs

Ultra personal computers (e.g., OQO)

PDAs

Smartphones

MP3 players (when appropriate)

Efficient, effective, unobtrusive DRM

Transparent to all authorized users

Sufficient revenue for a fair profit for for-profit entities in the ebook “value chain”

Authors (sometimes)

Publishers (sometimes)

Vendors (sometimes)   

Reasonable assurance of access in perpetuity

This is an area for risk management

Vendor cannot guarantee access in perpetuity

Libraries cannot guarantee demand in perpetuity

Some Case Studies

Neither of the first two case studies involves academic libraries, but, like CARLI, both are start-up “consortia”. 

Unabridged

http://www.unabridged.info

Digital audio books for blind library users

Using the Content Reserve platform from OverDrive

Self-funded

Multi-State

Shared Collection

Circulation a little disappointing to date

We Can Do It Project

http://www.fondulaclibrary.org/ivocalize.htm

42 public and school libraries in “downstate” IL

Grant-funded during the startup year

Group purchase of content from LibWise

No consortial collection.  Each participating library is developing its own collection. 

Circulation a little disappointing to date

Online communication has been very valuable to the member libraries

CARLI

CARLI is about “the sharing of collections, expertise, and programs.”  

As the CARLI Membership Agreement states, “…participation in a consortium requires collaboration in developing certain common policies and shared decision making.” 

Some Generalizations and Recommendations

Why do consortial/collaborative ebook programs make inherent sense?

Because digital distribution is more efficient than paper-based distribution systems, the number of copies needed within the system to meet demand declines. 

Ergo, if a group of libraries invest in a larger collective collection, users will be better served. 

Vendors, Library, and Consortia need to focus on compelling content and usage

Virtual Reference may be a cautionary tale here.  It has received much interest and support from the profession, but the usage statistics often are underwhelming. 

This will entail quite a bit of training, orientation, and marketing of the services of the new consortium. 

One Nagging Concern:  Fair Use is being redefined

Fair Use used to be a general social contract that was broadly defined by intentionally vague legislation.  Now, in addition to these broad social and legal contracts, many ebook systems are defining fair use in terms of a percentage of the content that can be copied and pasted by a user in a specified period of time. 

Develop a collaborative long-term relationship with the vendor

Consummating an agreement that results in the lease or purchase of an ebook collection is just the first step. 

Collaboration among libraries may lead to other types of collaborations and positive outcomes.