View the Unveiling of Democracy's Library

What if the Internet were a place where people could easily find quality reliable information without having to sift through hit after hit of commercially provided and often slanted—at best!—sites or even outright mis/disinformation? What if printed government publications had a place to be accessed without having to visit a physical location where they are so often buried without hope of easy discovery? What if government information was stored in such a way that an incoming administration, interested more in politics than in facts, could not “disappear” inconvenient truths? And what if libraries could freely access government funded research, as good governments intend, rather than watch publishers contain access and hide it behind paywalls?

One answer to all these questions is Democracy’s Library, “a free, open, online compendium of government research and publications from around the world.” Beginning with the USA and Canada and eventually expanding to democracies all over the world, Democracy’s Library will be an invaluable archive of quality information. That “freedom isn’t free” has become a cliched statement; nevertheless, if government information isn’t free, easily available, and preserved accurately, we all lose a valuable weapon in the fight for democracy in a time when it, and truth and accuracy, are increasingly challenged by those who tout freedom in a quest to impose undemocratic values on pluralistic and secular countries.

Watch a recording of the unveiling here.

Start exploring the collection here.

The Internet Archive’s Brewster Kahle has said "Democracies need an educated citizenry to thrive. In the 21st century, that means easy access to reliable information online for all." RF thanks Mr. Kahle and the Internet Archive, a library that is expanding information access for people and extending the reach of libraries world wide.

IA Library Leaders Forum Available for Viewing

Thank you to Chris Freeland for sharing news about yesterday’s Internet Archive Library Leaders Forum. Chris has posted the following, including a link to view a recording of the Forum:

The Library Leaders Forum is our annual gathering of leading experts from the library, copyright and information policy fields for a series of conversations about issues in libraries & information access. The session recording is now available for viewing, along with the resources shared during the discussion:

Watch Video

Take action!

 Yesterday we offered four different ways to take action & show your support for libraries, including:

1. Tweet about the #LibraryLeadersForum. Learn something new? New idea formed following the discussion? Let people know that you attended and your takeaways!

2. Thank the authors who have signed on to the #AuthorsForLibraries letter. Learn more.

3. Share your #OwnBooks story. Take a photo of yourself with a favorite book & share why that book is meaningful to you. More info.

4. Celebrate with the global community of readers, researchers & dreamers at next week's event, Building Democracy's Library. Register now.

Carl Malamud, Hero

As announced at yesterday's Library Leaders Forum, Carl Malamud, founder of Public.Resource.Org and a champion for making government information accessible to all, will receive the 2022 Internet Archive Hero Award. He will be presented the award at next week’s evening celebration, Building Democracy’s Library.

RF thanks Chris and the Internet Archive for their advocacy for libraries!

Summary Judgment Hearing Coming Up in IA Case

On October 7, both sides in the Hachette (etc.) vs. Internet Archive (IA) case filed their last round of briefs in the summary judgment phase. As always, Andrew Albanese is keeping a sharp eye on developments.

To summarize, he reports that the publishers’ attorneys have reiterated familiar arguments:

• The Internet Archive is a "commercial" actor and not a library

• CDL [Controlled Digital Lending} is “a cynical branding exercise designed to repackage industrial-scale copyright infringement as a legitimate enterprise.”

• They argue that “the purpose of copyright is to incentivize the creation of new works, authors and publishers—not IA—hold the exclusive right to publish their books in all formats and distribute them via select channels.”

Attorneys for the Internet Archive also repeat their basic positions:

• “All CDL does, and all it can ever do, is offer a limited, digital alternative to physically handing a book to a patron. Libraries deciding how to meet their patrons’ needs for digital access to books are not making a choice between paying e-book licensing fees or getting books for free. Libraries pay publishers under either approach.”

• Therefore, “librarians can continue to advance the ultimate purpose of copyright: ‘the intellectual enrichment of the public.’”

The Internet Archive has scored a few points over the large publisher points—and it goes without saying that many publishers are not involved and are more sympathetic and fair in pricing to libraries.

The Open Library is non-profit and not “commercial.” Saying that they accept donations, as the plaintiffs have, is simply nonsense. My library, and every library that I know of, accepts donations without being commercial.

This brings up another point that an attorney for the Association for American Publishers (AAP) has said, namely that the Internet Archive is not a library. Nobody working for a publisher lobby group has the moral or professional authority to declare what is or is not a library. The Open Library owns books, legitimately, having paid for them or had them donated (just like my library) and lets the public borrow them without charge (just like my library). How is it not a library?

Both sides have a point about copyright: it does incentivize the creation of works, and it also fosters the intellectual growth and awareness of a literate public. Copyright aims to balance these two positions. The issue then is the extent to which libraries, which have some protections under copyright law, can own a print copy and circulate a digital copy in an “owned to loan” ratio just as they do print works. All the books are in fact physical items that are owned. While the publishers might wish that they could get a cut every time a library circulates a physical item, under copyright they don’t. The publishers and authors have at some point been compensated for the titles that are circulating in CDL. That seems to take care of the incentivizing the creation of works. Libraries should, and must, be able to circulate what they own for the benefit of the public. Yes, this is a simplification, but it is, as the attorneys for the Archive say, what libraries do.

We in libraries can hope that the Internet Archive prevails in summary judgement. We’ll continue to license (though the ability to buy digital at fair prices would be even better!) and to buy print. CDL has great advantages for interlibrary loan and ultimately preservation. It can allow for the reading of books that have not been and never will be digitized by the publishers. never It is a useful tool, but it isn’t the answer for large scale library lending and will never replace our usual lending methods. We’ll know at some point, though this phase of the case might not be sorted for months. Losing would certainly chill efforts for libraries to fulfill their basic and still fundamental mission through a very useful but minor tool.

Intellectual Freedom News

NPR has reported that “a group of angry parents” is suing county officials in Llano, Texas over that county’s efforts to censor library materials. No county officials or their attorney agreed to be interviewed, but the suit alleges “the commissioners court created a new library advisory board, packed it with political appointees and closed the meetings to the public.“ Therefore, the “plaintiffs say they have no recourse but the courts.”

Said one plaintiff, Leila Green Little, “when my kids get older and they have something that they need to stand up for, I couldn't in good conscience tell them to speak up and speak out if I didn't do the same thing myself.” You go, Ms. Green Little! RF is an all-volunteer and unfunded group; while we wish we had funds to support you, we offer a shout out. The county removing books—and not just children’s books but teen/adult oriented ones such as Being Jazz: My Life as a (Transgender )Teen, Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents, and They Called Themselves The K.K.K.: The Birth Of An American Terrorist Group —from the library is a clear violation of the First Amendment, with a government entity suppressing speech in order to promote an anti-gay agenda and prevent a realistic consideration of our racist history.

Speaking of Intellectual Freedom, now’s is time to apply for three American Library Association Intellectual Freedom Round Table Committee Awards:

The John Phillip Immroth award honors the courage of a living individual, group, or organization setting an example for the defense and furtherance of the principles of intellectual freedom. The award consists of a citation and $500. Applications are open: https://ala.org/rt/ifrt/immroth.

Have (or know of) a good book on the theme of Intellectual Freedom published in 2021 or 2022? Could be non-fiction or fiction, youth, teen, or adult. Submit it to ALA's Oboler Award for consideration! https://ala.org/rt/ifrt/oboler. You could win a citation and $500.

The Gerald Hodges Award consists of a citation and $1,000 for an intellectual freedom focused organization for strong ongoing program or a single project supporting intellectual freedom, patron confidentiality, and anti-censorship. Apply today! https://ala.org/rt/ifrt/hodges.

A Follow-up on Authors for Libraries

Last Friday I posted about an open letter from Fight for the Future signed by (then) 300 authors asking for the publishers to give a better deal to libraries for digital content:

Enshrine the right of libraries to permanently own and preserve books, and to purchase these permanent copies on reasonable terms, regardless of format.

End lawsuits aimed at intimidating libraries and diminishing their role in society.

End smear campaigns against librarians.

The post noted that various trade associations were saying that the letter was misleading and a crypto-campaign sponsored by the Internet Archive. That latter claim rang to bizarre that I quickly, and correctly, called it phony and a smear. Now Lia Holland from Fight for the Future has gone further, calling out the Authors Guild’s lies forcefully and devastatingly.

Here are some samples, but do read the entire reply!:

The statement from the Authors Guild specifically asserts, without evidence, that “multiple authors” who signed this letter feel they were “misled”. This assertion is false and we challenge these lobbyists to either provide evidence for their claim or retract it.

One author, named in the Authors Guild statement, did ask to be removed from the letter last night just before it was published. We respected and complied with his request. But it is utterly false to claim that he never agreed to sign the letter or that we “misled” him about its contents. We have the paper trail to show as much. Any lobbyist claims to the contrary are easily, provably false and we will provide screenshots of our communications to journalists on background if requested.

Any assertion that authors are unable to read and understand this letter is condescending—the truth is that the publishing lobby must accept is that not all authors and creative workers share the common view in corporate publishing that the censorship and surveillance inherent in the maximalist copyright system they support are necessary to ensure fair compensation for creative labor.

Further, the Authors Guild appears to assert in an email to their membership that there have been various “versions” of the letter in circulation, implying that Fight for the Future fooled authors into signing one version and then disingenuously made a bunch of alterations. That assertion is wholly false. There has only ever been one version of this letter.

There are many issues in which we agree with organizations like the Authors Guild, and we hope to work together in coalition someday on important issues surrounding artists’ rights such as antitrust legislation, book bans, Amazon’s exploitation of authors, or the truly abhorrent under-compensation of authors and publishing professionals amid record profits in big publishing. For now . . . While the corporate publishing lobby would love to live in a world of monochromatic author groupthink, unfortunately today they must face once and for all that many authors disavow the idea that libraries should take a lesser role in the ownership and preservation of books in the digital age.

As part of a group whose work has been falsely labeled as supported by “Big Tech” with the aim of undermining copyright—both allegations are lies—I recommend believing Fight for the Future in this dispute. It’s shameful that various trade organizations and affiliated bloggers rely on disinformation when engaged in a defense of big publishers’ library ebook practices. Oh well, on the surface it certainly looks better for them than admitting the truth: that digital is unfairly priced because libraries currently have no right of first sale in digital and the publishers can get away with it because librarians want to meet public demand for reading.

Authors For Libraries

When I talk with members of the public about library ebooks being unfairly priced, I’m often asked “Do any writers support libraries?” I usually answer that some do, but their publishers seem to tell them that libraries ebooks are bad for their income. They naturally believe it and so don’t speak out.

I’m delighted to be able to change my answer.

Fight for the Future has published an open letter signed by over 300 authors in support of libraries and defending them against attacks by the publishing industry and its lobbyi . . . um, trade associations.

Please read the letter in its entirety to see the links supporting its positions. Here are those positions:

Enshrine the right of libraries to permanently own and preserve books, and to purchase these permanent copies on reasonable terms, regardless of format.

End lawsuits aimed at intimidating libraries and diminishing their role in society.

End smear campaigns against librarians.

I say “Hear hear!” to all. As someone who has been called a dupe for “Big Tech” because of my work on Maryland’s ebook law, the third point strikes a personal note. Thank you, writers, for standing up for librarians. If I were a catspaw for “Big Tech,” likely our bill would have been so legally grounded as to be unassailable and certainly the money to appeal the judge’s (wrongful, in my view) ruling would somehow have appeared. Just in case I am a dupe and stooge and simply don’t know it, though, Hey Google, how about a donation for my library! :-)

Of course the trade associations are on the attack, as reported by Andrew Albanese, “ insisting they do support public libraries, and suggesting that the letter is an Internet Archive–backed PR campaign..” If you support public libraries so much, folks, why are the digital prices for libraries so outrageously inflated when compared to print? And the suggestion that this is somehow a nefarious plot by the Internet Archive is just another baseless smear. Big publishers, I challenge you to look at our Publisher Price Watch and tell me honestly that you support libraries. You whack us because unfair laws allow you to extort money from the public coffers, knowing we are under so much pressure to provide content at any price. For once, come for fair negotiations. You won’t lose money. If anything, we’ll increase our digital spending. For the good of readers and reading, DO support us, as partners in maintaining a literate and informed populace.

It Seems Few REALLY Want to Ban Books

EveryLibrary recently conducted a poll on “Voter Perceptions of Book Bans in the United States.”

I’m not sure if they interviewed anyone in Llano, Texas or Jamestown Township, Michigan (to name just two places leading the charge to benighted theocracy—hey, “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them”), but it turns out most people of all political stripes think the answer to speech is always more speech:

These findings might surprise you! 

• Voters love librarians and rank librarians as twice as favorable as their governors, the Democratic Party, the GOP, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden. (click to tweet)
  

• 95% of Democrats, 80% of independents, and 53% of Republicans are against book bans and will consider book bans when voting. (click to tweet)
  

• MINORITY RULE: Just 8% of voters believe “there are many books that are inappropriate and should be banned.” (click to tweet)
  

• 31% of Republicans think there is absolutely no time when a book should be banned. (click to tweet)
  

• MINORITY RULE: Only 18% of voters support book banning on issues of race and CRT. (click to tweet)
  

• More than 90% of voters are against banning the hundreds of classic novels and children's books that extremist groups have targeted for banning. (click to tweet)
  

• MINORITY RULE: Only one-third of voters support bans on books that discuss sexuality. (click to tweet)
  

• 75% of voters will consider book banning when voting in November. (click to tweet)
  

• More than 50% of voters are concerned about legislation being created to regulate Americans’ access to books. (click to tweet)

RF invites readers to read the report and support EveryLibrary and to get vocal. We have a lot more voices than the book banners. “Cry aloud, spare not; Lift up your voice like a trumpet!”

Alan Inouye's Public Policy and Advocacy Statement

ALA’s Senior Director, Public Policy & Government Relations Alan Inouye has sent a list of updates with many items of interest to library ebook aficionados:

--> Action.  Sign up for the Unite Against Book Bans campaign. It is easy to sign up. Be informed about what's happening to libraries and library workers in the book banning & censorship arenas. And take action if you can, with ALA.

https://uniteagainstbookbans.org/

 --> Action.  Congress is finalizing a budget (FY23) that includes dedicated library facilities funding for the first time in over 25 years! But the House hasn't yet signed on. Contact your Members of Congress:

https://twitter.com/LibraryPolicy/status/1570826094059859969

https://t.co/s5MyXLYVOO

--> Action.  Register your library for National Voter Registration Day, September 30.

https://twitter.com/LibraryPolicy/status/1568345028585734145

--> Upcoming.  Webinar on the future of ebook legislation with panel comprising Briana McNamee, Michael Blackwell, Irene Padilla, Kyle Courtney, and Alan Inouye. Hosted by DPLA with COSLA & ReadersFirst.

https://twitter.com/dpla/status/1570769682038403078

AP News: "Book ban efforts surging in 2022, library association says."

https://apnews.com/article/libraries-american-library-association-book-banning-af7c9f312266b572c3dc189b1d109de4

https://www.ala.org/news/press-releases/2022/09/ala-releases-preliminary-data-2022-book-bans

 Banned Books Week programming:  There's a lot to see and do. Check it out.

https://www.ala.org/news/press-releases/2022/09/american-library-association-highlights-increasing-censorship-attempts-during

 Sen. Lujan and Rep. Matsui introduce the Digital Equity Foundation Act of 2022. Quote by ALA President Lessa Kananiʻopua Pelayo-Lozada included in the Congressional release. This legislation would divert some revenue from FCC spectrum auctions to the funding of a digital equity foundation to provide grants to libraries and other eligible institutions. Currently, this revenue flows into the U.S. Treasury.

https://twitter.com/AlanSInouye/status/1570507146839863296

ALA releases highlights report of our Libraries Build Business initiative, which advances entrepreneurship and small business through libraries, especially for groups that are underrepresented in small business/entrepreneurship.

https://twitter.com/ALALibrary/status/1570136560632483840

 Pew Stateline article "Librarians and Lawmakers Push for Greater Access to E-Books" includes key librarians around the country, as well as PPA's Alan Inouye

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2022/09/06/librarians-and-lawmakers-push-for-greater-access-to-e-books

 ALA congratulates Scott Matheson on his appointment as the Superintendent of Documents at the Government Publishing Office. In this role, he supervises the Federal Depository Library Program.

https://twitter.com/LibraryPolicy/status/1568235593842262016

 ALA supports Congresswoman Nikema Williams' Home Internet Accessibility Act, legislation that would fund a comprehensive new plan to address nationwide broadband inaccessibility in federally assisted housing.

https://twitter.com/LibraryPolicy/status/1567962368004734978

 ALA President-elect Emily Drabinski meets with ALA Public Policy and Advocacy Office in Washington, D.C. She received two days of briefings on policy and advocacy.

https://twitter.com/LibraryPolicy/status/1570100923032272896

NEWS, ARTICLES, RESOURCES

Volunteer to serve on ALA committees (like the ones in the Public Policy & Advocacy Office). Deadline is September 30.  Also need to request renewals for an additional term of service.

https://www.ala.org/news/member-news/2022/07/volunteer-serve-ala-council-and-joint-committees-2023-2025

https://twitter.com/ALALibrary/status/1568231851109634048

 National Book Foundation:  ALA Executive Director Tracie Hall will receive the 2022 Literarian Award at the 73rd National Book Awards Ceremony.

https://twitter.com/nationalbook/status/1567518514788851712

 Over the next year, IMLS will convene an interagency taskforce & facilitate the development of a portal of resources bridging information literacy research & practice to advance information literacy within communities.

https://twitter.com/US_IMLS/status/1570453353896857602

Webinar of Interest and PEW Article

This free webinar is likely to be of interest:

Collaborating for Access: The Outlook for Library Ebook Legislation, presented by COSLA, DPLA, and ReadersFirst

Tuesday, September 27, at 1 pm ET

In this fourth in our Collaborating for Access series of webinars hosted by COSLA, DPLA, and ReadersFirst, we’ll look at the recent push for ebook legislation, and what it could mean for patron access to digital content. We’ll bring together a panel of librarians and thought leaders to discuss the progress of various legislation efforts, potential ramifications, and what might come next.

Speakers will include:

Kyle Courtney, Copyright Advisor, Harvard University and Co-founder and Board Chair, Library Futures

Alan Inouye, Senior Director, Public Policy and Government Relations, ALA

Briana McNamee, Director of Government Relations and Advocacy, New York Library Association

Irene Padilla, Maryland State Librarian

Please register here.

 PEW recently featured an article by Caitlin Dewey on the topic of library ebooks that is also likely to be of interest: Librarians and Lawmakers Push for Greater Access to E-Books | The Pew Charitable Trusts (pewtrusts.org)

The article does a good job describing the issues and explaining where efforts are now. It’s well worth a read. One statement in it, however, won’t go with comment here:

“Libraries are an important part of the copyright ecosystem as authorized distributors,” said Terrence Hart, the general counsel for the Association of American Publishers, in a statement to Stateline. “There won’t be anything to distribute if states destroy the incentives and protections of authors to license and exploit their exclusive rights to their works.”

This is a red herring. The states aren’t trying to destroy any incentives and protections. We are trying to get fair pricing. None of the bills have any issue with licensing per se. The authors may keep their rights. What we want is a print equivalent deal. For a 2 year or 30 circ license, charge the cost of the print book. (Any librarian can explain this is actually not as good an ROI as we get from a typical hardcover, with print circs greatly exceed those allowed by license terms and the added ability of giving the book to Friends groups later.) For a longer term license (maybe even perpetual), raise the price. It’s worked in print for hundreds of years and authors and publishers are fine. The publishers wish to exploit loopholes in copyright for digital to jack up prices. So shut up about “authorized distributors,” which none of the upcoming laws will challenge, and enter into fair negotiations that would make the laws unnecessary.

Fight Book Bans

Christopher Finan, Executive Director of the National Coalition Against Censorship, has written an op-ed in Publishers Weekly about the need to fight the increasingly frequent and organized book challenges that are occurring in many states.

Amon other things, he writes the following:

. . . once again, the defenders of free expression and the freedom to read are fighting back. During this year’s Banned Books Week—September 18–24—librarians, booksellers, publishers, and authors will again urge the American people to reject censorship. The ALA has just launched a national campaign, Unite Against Book Bans (uniteagainstbookbans.org), to mobilize the solid majority of people who oppose efforts to remove books from schools and public libraries.

The long history of book banning in America gives us reason to hope that the freedom to read will prevail—but only if we fight for it.

Hear, hear! Ebooks are of course a censor’s dream. You can’t steal them or hide them in the stacks like you can print books (as one dogmatic, benighted, undemocratic, and know-nothing organization unworthy of being named here has advocated), but imagine being able to mobilize a community to censor a whole digital service. Thousands of books could be removed all at once. Oh the joy of telling other people what they should be able to read to suit your own narrow-minded beliefs!

RF encourages libraries to build digital bookshelves of Banned Books in their ebook platforms to celebrate Banned Books Week next week and all librarians to join Unite Against Book Bans.

It you don’t fight, someday they WILL come for your library too.