Alan Inouye's December 18 Public Policy and Advocacy Updates, December 18

ALA Senior Director, Public Policy & Government Relations and Interim Associate Executive Director Alan Inouye has shared this week’s updates. Always something here of interest to the library community. Thanks, Alan! 

>> Continuing:  Please sign up for the Unite Against Book Bans campaign if you or your organization has not yet done so. Many have joined but many have not.

https://uniteagainstbookbans.org/

 > Tell Congress to Support End-of-Year Library Funding Requests.

https://oneclickpolitics.global.ssl.fastly.net/messages/edit?promo_id=18455

 >> See you at the LibLearnX conference in New Orleans, end of January. Conference includes public policy, advocacy, and book banning/censorship programming.

https://www.2023.alaliblearnx.org/

 ALA is proud to support the Adult Education WORKS Act, legislation to strengthen funding & coordination for adult education, including at public libraries! Thank you to Sen. Reed (D-RI) and Sen. Todd Young (R-IN) for the bipartisan introduction of this bill. ALA has been working on this bill for many months. Will be lobbying on it in 2023.

https://twitter.com/LibraryPolicy/status/1600889232150515712

Missouri's proposed administrative rule threatens to diminish library programs and services for ALL Missourians. ALA stands Missouri libraries and library associations. ALA makes formal comments.

https://twitter.com/ALALibrary/status/1603095006637694977

 FCC seeks comment on expanding eligibility of network security in the E-rate program. ALA has been advocating for this change for years.

https://www.fcc.gov/document/wcb-seeks-comment-e-rate-eligibility-advanced-firewalls

 The Digital Equity Foundation Act provisions are still alive as Congress tries to come to a resolution on the authorization for spectrum auctions in this lame duck session. This Act would enable some spectrum auction proceeds to fund digital inclusion programs, including all libraries of all types. Thank you to Sen. Lujan for his leadership!

https://twitter.com/MCalabreseNAF/status/1602682844769406980

 ALA joins Education Superhighway/coalition letter to raise concerns about the inclusion of community anchor institutions in broadband maps—libraries are often not included, or included improperly.

https://www.educationsuperhighway.org/wp-content/uploads/FINAL-ESH_SHLB-FCC-National-Broadband-Map-Concerns-MDUs_CAIs.pdf

 

U.S. Copyright Office completes study on changes to the best edition requirement: It will make no changes. ALA, through the Library Copyright Alliance, submitted comments recommending no changes

https://twitter.com/AlanSInouye/status/1599410791307833344

 ALA joined a letter to the U.S. Copyright Office by the Authors Alliance with other signatories voicing support for the US Copyright Office’s proposed rule regarding termination rights under the Music Modernization Act’s blanket license.

https://twitter.com/AlanSInouye/status/1601670633309409280

 

Rhode Island librarians, including COL Chair Ed Garcia, visit Sen. Jack Reed and thank him for the Right to Read Act

https://twitter.com/LibraryPolicy/status/1602407817088012289

 REPORTS AND ARTICLES

 "Trust our Librarians" at a recent meeting of the St. Tammany Parish (Louisiana) Library Board

https://twitter.com/ALALibrary/status/1603404421114781699

 More Rhode Island: U.S. Commerce Secretary Raimondo: "It's always great to be back home in Rhode Island! This afternoon, I stopped by the Providence Public Library to announce $5.5 million in new grants coming to the state — a down payment in our work to bring affordable, high-speed internet to every Rhode Islander."

https://twitter.com/SecRaimondo/status/1594826949997862934

 In the New York Times: "I want to take a moment to say thank you for some of the most meaningful time I’ve spent in my life, time alone in quiet space: my time in libraries,” writes Charles M. Blow.

https://twitter.com/nytopinion/status/1595713046344785920

Some IA News: A Favorable View in LAT and an Upcoming Event

Chris Freeland from the Internet Archive points out a business column by Michael Hiltzik in the LA Times commenting on Brewster Kahle’s recent post on the ephemerality of digital books. Platform creep and format obsolesence do indeed make ebooks strikingly short-lived—a reason why ReadersFirst has long advocated against proprietary formats, even knowing no format is forever. The article is well-worth a read by librarians, but in summary Hiltzik rightly notes the following:

“As digital books mature from a novel technology into a quotidian one, there is no reason why the rights conferred by ownership should be materially different from those that come with a book one can hold in one’s hands. None, except that publishers and distributors have been able to get away with quietly shrinking those rights.”

The “quietly” part is perhaps open to question—we’ve even passed a state law about it, and have many more planned—but not the “get away with quietly shrinking those rights.” Thanks, Mr. Freeland and Kahle, for your continued advocacy for libraries, and Mr. Hiltzik for pointing out (again) that is it way past time to reform copyright for the digital age.

Coming from the IA in 2023:

The Best Things in Life Are Free: Public Domain Day 2023
January 19 & 20

The moon belongs to everyone, so says the 1927 hit musical composition, “The Best Things In Life Are Free.” We agree! In January of 2023, a treasure trove of new cultural works will become as free as the moon and the stars, and we at Internet Archive, Creative Commons and many other leaders from the open world plan to throw a party to celebrate!

January 20: In-Person Film Remix Contest* Screening Party

Fight for the Future: "Stop Grinching Libraries"

The good folks at Fight for the Future are calling out the Association of American Publishers (AAP) to change course:

  1. Stop acting as legal counsel for the publishers who are suing the Internet Archive

  2. Announce an end to massive anti-library lobbying expenditures

  3. Stop celebrating public figures who threaten marginalized voices

My experience with the AAP, which seemed perfectly happy to spread mis/disinformation in the Maryland ebook lawsuit, is that they will simply claim it’s all an attack by unwitting stooges acting as cats-paws for Big Tech to destroy copyright and the publishing industry. But hey, why not clap back! Join the principled opposition. Show that you recognize that libraries are being shafted by unfair terms as the publishers extort us, using outmoded copyright laws to milk public coffers because our patrons very much want to read in digital. The question is rapidly becoming, can we afford to support digital sustainably; many libraries are having to cut back. The AAP won’t be budged, but our voices should be heard. Change will be long in coming—we are up against billions in mega-corp power— but library users deserve no less.

Sign the petition here.

Cheers and Jeers 2022

2022 has been a challenging year for librarians providing digital content. Price hikes, even if small, and unfair license terms—at least compared to most print—mean that we often must offer less for the same amount of money, or even less while spending more. Libraries that used ARPA money for digital won’t have that funding source anymore. Most libraries, fortunately, are seeing an increase in in-person user visits and print circulation as the pandemic becomes endemic. While the visits are of course much desired, they put the pressure on balancing digital vs. more traditional materials spending. We can’t put all, or even most, of our eggs into the digital basket. Let us then begin our list with a CHEER for all librarians who patiently work to get the best return for limited materials budgets, trying to balance the best-sellers with the interesting new or midlist author title, striving for diversity while meeting demand.

A CHEER for the publishers who have started or continue to offer flexible licensing terms. The ability to license individual works differently allows best use of library funding. The holy grail—the ability to get a title both for perpetual use and at a lower cost metered model—remains elusive, at least from the larger publishers, but many smaller or medium sized publishers are working with libraries.

A related CHEER for DPLA for bringing Amazon and Audible unique content through the Palace Exchange libraries, with 3 license options. It would be nice if perpetual access were an option, but having the content, some of it in high demand, is nevertheless excellent. Thanks for working with now 30 or so publishers to provide flexible terms! CHEERS, too, for producing the free COVID archive titles and the “January 6th on the Record” title.

A CHEER for the small but (we can hope!) growing number aof publishers such as Brick House, Pressbooks, Librivox, and Postlight, for “BRIET, a simple, user-friendly system whereby publishers large and small can offer permanent, library-ready digital assets to libraries, for sale or for free distribution.” We have a lot of work to do to figure out how to manage such titles, including bringing them into our digital platforms Still, owning digital at a reasonable price is a welcome idea. A related cheer for Maria Bustillos is in order for her advocacy for libraries this year.

A CHEER for all the states that have brought forward or have been planning ebook bills to get better terms from the publishers. We know of New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Virginia, Missouri, Tennessee, Utah, Nevada, Washington, and Maryland. If I’ve left you off this list, let me know!

A CHEER for Library Futures and Fight for the Future for their advocacy work in support of libraries being able to fulfill their traditional mission in the digital realm. Working with states to sharpen ebook legislation and the 1000+ Author project are excellent work.

A CHEER for NISO for sponsoring work on creating standards for using Controlled Digital Lending with the Interoperable System of Controlled Digital Lending initiative. CDL is and should be legal, and developing ways to share content well with it is a boon for library users.

A CHEER for the New York Public Library and the Brooklyn Public Library for their support of Intellectual Freedom by making ebooks of challenged titles available nationwide. “Books for All” and “Books Unbanned” allow teens to read books they might not be able to access locally because of censorship efforts. Reading wins, censorship—deservedly!—loses

A CHEER for a few of the larger (and not so large) publishers. Penguin Random House extended its pandemic licensing models through at least March of 2023. Hey, PRH, how’s about making them permanent? Scholastic has offered some very good deals on school bundles, as has Annick Press. Blackstone has added three licensing options in the Palace Marketplace. Thanks for helping schools and libraries better meet patron/student needs!

A CHEER for the Internet Archive for its defense of Controlled Digital Lending (for that’s what the publisher suit against the Archive is all about), for starting Democracy’s Library, and for the work towards Building a Better Internet by securing digital rights for libraries.

A CHEER for Mr. Andrew Albanese of Publishers Weekly for covering library stories fully, well, and without bias. His most recent article on The Top 10 Library Stories of 2022 is a fine example and well worth a read.

A CHEER for the Maryland Attorney General’s Office, for defending Maryland’s ebook law. As all our readers surely know, the law did not withstand the legal challenge to it, even though the judge did note that libraries are being disadvantaged by current law. They represented the will of Marylanders and Maryland legislators well in the fight to get more fair terms on library digital content. We’ve all learned from this event, and we (and other states) WILL be back with a law that will withstand a challenge.

We are RF are generally a CHEERful lot at year’s end, but we do alas have a few JEERS to make.

A JEER for price increases. As noted in our News earlier this year, many large publishers are increasing library ebook prices. Why? Are there additional costs associated with producing them? Doesn’t seem that there would be. Can’t blame this one on supply chain issues. As if licensing terms weren’t already bad enough. It’s not been the best year for library digital content.

A JEER for the four publishers suing the Internet Archive over CDL, with an additional raspberry for the AAP. The jeer isn’t for the suit itself, though you could have dropped it after the IA shut down the National Emergency Library. It’s for the disinformation that is being employed in the suit and that you tell your authors. The books are reproduced without “paying rights holders”? Nope. They are books. They are being circulated one at at time. Every book was paid for at some point. This is a legitimate use of library materials. The effort to license everything under the guise of the books somehow being different because digital is a disservice to readers and a prime example of why the copyright laws desperately need to be reworked. The added AAP raspberry is not for fighting Maryland’s ebook law—that just their job—but, as noted in The New Republic, for giving an award for distinguished service to a book banner. Isn’t that a great way to support the First Amendment!

The biggest JEER goes to the at least 12 states (and 34 separate bills) with legislation aimed at restricting teaching about sexuality, gender, and race/ethnicity, not to mention Louisiana’s “rat out a library tip line.” As NYT investigates, these are not grass-roots efforts. The focus on BIPOC and LGBTQ+ authors/titles show the clear and repressive political motivation. A huge CHEER, then, for librarians everywhere, fighting for the freedom to read, even as we are vilified and even threatened. Hey, critics—where does most abuse occur? Look in the home. Look on the smart phones. It ain’t in the library and ain’t fostered by the books you are trying to ban. We know that not every book suits every age of child, but you don’t get to say what is right for other people’s children . . . as if the motivation really were protecting children and not your political aims.

Happy Holidays to all from RF! Thanks to all who earned cheers. Keep up the great work. May 2023 be better for library ebooks than 2022 generally has been. I’m looking forward to some new state laws that might begin to level a very tilted playing field.

Securing Digital Rights for Libraries

When the World Wide Web came along, there were many predictions that it would mean the end of libraries. Reports of libraries’ collective demise were of course an exaggeration. We’re as busy as ever, often because of the ‘Net, and remain strong n providing quality information and entertainment. But what about the ‘Net? The question is not how widely used it is, but how healthy it is, especially in providing the free and accurate information that was forecast by its champions to lead to a human transformation. The answer, for all the good one can find online, is not very. Disinformation, pay walls, and the perpetuation of suffering (with, to quote the BBC”s Coupling, the creation of “an enormous international database of naked” people) are on full display.

What if it could be better? Our friends at the Internet Archive and Movement for a Better Internet are asking.

Thanks to Lila Bailey for sharing news of a new report, “Securing Digital Rights for Libraries: Towards an Affirmative Policy Agenda for a Better Internet.” She notes what ReadersFirst have long advocated for:

The rights that libraries have always enjoyed offline must also be protected online. The report articulates a set of four digital rights for libraries, based on the core library functions of preserving and providing access to information, knowledge, and culture.

  • Collect digital materials, including those made available only via streaming and other restricted means, through purchase on the open market or any other legal means, no matter the underlying file format;

  • Preserve those materials, and where necessary repair or reformat them, to ensure their long-term existence and availability;

  • Lend digital materials, at least in the same “one person at a time” manner as is traditional with physical materials;

  • Cooperate with other libraries, by sharing or transferring digital collections, so as to provide more equitable access for communities in remote and less well-funded areas.

Download the free and open-license report HERE.

Consider joining on Thursday, December 8 (1 PM Eastern) a webinar discussion about the report with leaders from Internet Archive, Public Knowledge, Creative Commons, and the Association of Research Libraries.

Above all, advocate for the Four Digital Rights. Inform your patrons. Lobby your legislators. Publishers can have fair prices without devastating libraries and their mission. In this case, as in so many, libraries are the bulwark of democracy.

Digital library books on NPR's Planet Money

Our own Michael Blackwell spoke for libraries last week on NPR's Planet Money.  Thank you, Michael, for thoughtfully walking through the interviewers' questions and demonstrating the challenges we are facing with digital books.  You are always an articulate spokesperson, and we are proud to have your voice on this national platform!

Michael comments on the midlist author, who is interviewed first:

"One of the worst problems with current licenses is that they create a lack of diversity in our collections and disadvantage the least affluent among us by limiting libraries ability to provide a wider range and amount of content. The author interviewed (a midlist author from an indie publisher) is actually a perfect example: current terms generally skew our collections to the most popular things, greatly disadvantaging new/mid-tier authors whose works cost the same as, say, a John Grisham. I’m sorry she seems to think libraries are “giving away” her work, but this is not correct.  We know that some publishers tell authors that libraries are hurting them, but we actually pay far more for an ebook than for print. Fewer authors get to benefit with digital than with print."

Carmi wants to comment on the other person that Planet Money interviewed, John Sargent, former CEO of Macmillan. Sargent's talking points in defense of the Macmillan embargo are the same ones he used in 2019. Here are some questions that Carmi wishes Planet Money had asked him:

If digital library books are truly an existential threat to Macmillan, why did he permit the company to enter that market at all?

The library embargo has now been defunct for over 2 1/2 years. Is Macmillan going out of business due to eLending, or for any other reason?

What evidence does Mr. Sargent have for the claim that that the "friction" inherent in borrowing a physical library book is responsible for historical book sales?  He states "In the old days, I want to check a book out of the library. I get in my car. I drive over there. I go into the library. I find the book. I take it to the front..."  He thus implies that, because of these barriers inherent in borrowing, some people would buy books. But all of this travel-related friction also applied to buying books. You had to get in your car, go to a bookstore, find the book, take it to the front, etc.

Digital books do remove travel-related barriers for borrowers. But they also remove those barriers for buyers. It is easy to sit on the couch with one's phone and borrow a book.  It is also easy to sit on one's couch with a phone and buy it.

In other words, there is nothing about digital lending that makes borrowing easier or buying harder than it ever was. With both physical and digital books, there are only two real friction points that readers balance: wait time and price.

The librarians who wrote to Mr. Sargent to protest the embargo explained this in detail, but he persists three years later in explaining that digital borrowing works in a way that it simply does not.  He does so, even though the embargo reportedly lost Macmillan millions of dollars, and although none of his dire predictions for the company have materialized.  Why?  Is it possible that the friction theory was never the real reason for the embargo?  That, all the time, it was simply about squeezing a little more profit out of a convenient and normally cooperative customer?  What purpose does the friction theory serve, if not the truth? Well, it casts a billion-dollar international corporation as a helpless victim of digital disruption rather than a villain, and the story seems to have worked on Planet Money. But the facts are that Macmillan hijacked library service and made borrowing harder for people who can’t afford books so as to manipulate an affluent few into buying. Macmillan is not the victim here.

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.