Collection Development and Management 2007 Conference Reports
Moderator
Brian Burns, Hampden-Sydney College
Charge
Provide a forum for study and discussion of the selection, acquisition and cataloging of items, and the evaluation and weeding of members’ collections
Topics for Discussion
- Weeding Media Collections: Policies, Procedures, Resources
- Determining Unique Items in a Media Collection
- Archiving Unique Titles and/or Formats
Conference Session Report
This particular session of the Collection Development & Management Interest Group was a unique one. Instead of the typical forum-style open discussion, there were two presenters who discussed and demonstrated their institutions’ particular way of utilizing streaming content and how patrons gained access through their library’s OPAC (Online Public Access Catalog) system.
Jane Hutchison of William Paterson University headed a state-wide committee to find a way to purchase and deliver video content through streaming. The easy part was purchasing; the difficult part was delivery. William Paterson along with other consortium in the state won an IMLS grant to develop a video portal for the state. In the meantime, William Paterson is using a server to store video content and through Windows Media Player and a link in the Library’s OPAC for faculty and students to gain access. Faculty and students are authenticated using EZ Proxy. Films Media Group was the pilot for the state. Other content is being purchased/licensed and is currently being streamed.
Jeff Clark of James Madison University began making use of digital content online, after consulting with OhioLink. When they started out, they wanted a good sized collection, so they went to Films for the Humanities & Sciences (before they were known as Films Media Group) and began with 561 titles. At the current time, they are streaming over 2000 titles from various vendors. (VIVA, the Virginia library consortium, has licensed about 500 of these titles from PBS Video.) The films appear in the JMU OPAC, Innovative Millennium.
One of the critical issues affecting all who enter the realm of streaming video contracts is the length of the term of the contract. Typically, although not always, the contract is for a period between three and seven years, which amounts to more of a lease than a purchase. The main argument for purchasing titles in perpetuity can be compared directly to purchasing DVDs. The title is yours once you buy it. However some content providers tend to focus on two different counterpoints in support of their lease plans. First, in similar fashion to the DVD format, when format changes inflict themselves on the digital market, libraries will have to adopt the new format and re-purchase titles on that new format. It is likely that digital formats will change as well, thus creating a similar re-purchase situation.
It was suggested that CCUMC take the lead in developing guidelines for negotiating with content providers for perpetual rights to titles. One thing that must be kept in mind is that CCUMC is made up of both consumers and content providers. We should not, and indeed cannot, afford to be one-sided on this issue. We must seek to find a fair and equitable conclusion to this dilemma, one that is mutually agreeable as well as mutually beneficial. Perhaps that points to perpetual licensing, or reasonably priced annual renewals. CCUMC could potentially pave the way toward digital harmony.
**Program note – Sue Parks of the University of North Texas was scheduled to demonstrate the UNT digital delivery system, but unforeseen circumstances prevented this from occurring.