APPENDIX 107
Memorandum from Stephen Godfree, Leaf
Coppin Technical Publishers
I should like to comment on the supposed problems
surrounding libraries and the academic journals market. As a scientific
publisher of over twenty years' experience, and a writer on copyright,
my observations may be of some use.
You should be aware that UK librarians, whatever
their present complaints, were quite happy to be part of the non-fee
paying "library privilege" copying that the British
Library exploited more (or less) legally under the Copyright Designs
and Patents Act 1988. supposedly for "research and private
study", this phrase was liberally interpreted as including
commercial companies, who were quite happy to pay the falsely
low prices charged by the BL's Document Supply Centre, with which
we could not compete. This was a major cause of loss of income
for publishers, for which they have had to compensate. The enclosed
piece gives more detail.
Scientific publishers may also have overseas
customers who, not being controlled by EU directive, can copy
without payment to copyright owners. These include American universities,
who copy under the "Inter-Library Loan" banner, as well
as known violators in countries such as India and China. Such
continuing losses have also to be countered by higher prices if
publications are to survive.
The fortuitous development of web-based electronic
publishing, with its powers of control over access, has a huge
potential benefit to scientific publishers, who can by this means
avoid the depradations of the copying community, librarians included,
and so restore the balance that used to hold, It equally permits
the provision of lower priced academic access. Allow the publishers
to develop this model, now that (only in the past months) copying
has been brought into check by the implementation of the EU copyright
directive, and you will find that scientific publishers, who are
fully aware of the need for harmony with the academic world, will
act accordingly.
The problems that librarians, particularly the
British Library, have faced in terms of pricing, are largely of
their own making. I hope that in hearing their pleas, you will
apply a degree of objectivity as to the causes.
February 2004
|