In Beverly, Massachusetts a mob of 20 LibraryThing enthusiasts cataloged the entire collection of St. John’s church library, as well as the rector’s book collection, consisting of over 2,000 books (averaging 100 books per person).

Akin to an Amish barn-raising, the idea was to get a group together and get the job done in one day.

found via the LibraryThing blog

* disclaimer:  I find this interesting on its own, but as I am in a middle of a months-long group project to move my church’s catalog to a different ILS (as well as getting them an OPAC) I can only feel jealous about the speed at which this was accomplished.

RFID, which stands for Radio Frequency Identification, is currently the leading edge in managing inventories  and supply chains of items in a variety of industries, as well as acting as a personal identification device.  It is used in many situations, from retail warehouses, to highway toll collections, and even in libraries.

Post-it notes are a particular brand of notepads that have a coating of adhesive along the edge of each sheet of paper, allowing the user to stick them to nearly anything.  Yes, even in libraries.

And now, some bright group of researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have combined the two to create a new way to use each of these technologies.

MIT Reinvents the Post-It note… with Post-It notes

I don’t see it doing much for libraries, but it is an interesting technology mashup!

found via LISNews

The topic of Copyfraud has been on my mind for the past few months.  It is interesting how once you start noticing something relatively subtle, you can reach a point where you start seeing it all the time.  This has been one of those things.

Copyfraud is best defined by the above linked Wikipedia article, but what I seem to keep encountering is the overly restrictive assertions of copyright by those who should know better.  The most grating example I have encountered, more so because it is such an interesting publication, is the photocopy authorization statement in the magazine Strategic Finance:

Authorization to photocopy Strategic Finance.  Items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by the IMA to libraries and other users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) Transactional Reporting Service, provided that the base fee of $3.00 per copy, plus 30¢ per page, is paid directly to CCC, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923.  (www.copyright.com) ISSN 1524-833X, $3.00 + 30¢.

For reprint information contact …[section omitted]…

For permission to make 1-50 copies of articles contact:  Copyright Clearance Center www.copyright.com or fax (978) 774-4470.

Read it carefully… it doesn’t quite state that an individual making a copy of an article for personal use must be registered with the CCC and pay the fee, but it really reads that way.  I read it as if an individual isn’t a library, then they fall into the “other users” category.  If that is correct, then registration and payment seems required.

Which is balderdash, of course.  Fair use is very well established for this behavior.  If restricting photocopies in the manner were allowed under copyright law, then Inter-Library Loan and much of the personal and professional educational research behavior as we know it would disappear.

Another example:  The other day someone told me of an experience they had in a library while doing research for their Master’s thesis.  They had an 18xx edition of a book that was one of their primary sources.  It wasn’t in the best of shape, so she decided to photocopy the entire book to save it from wear.  A library employee stopped her from making the copies because it was “against copyright”.  Buzzzzz, wrong answer… anything created before January 1, 1923 is public domain, and therefore free of any and all copyright restrictions.

Remember to focus not only on the restrictions, but on the freedoms of copyright.  I don’t know if the person who stopped her was a librarian, but remember that to most patrons, we are all librarians (which to me translates to “we are all information professionals”).  This means that we should be sure to have at least a basic understanding of individual freedoms when dealing with copyright, and should be sure to not overextend our answers beyond what we know.

Overly restrictive and slippery notices are just one small part of Copyfraud.  Start watching for this in your daily routines, if only to allow you to better answer questions for yourself and others.

the blog posting that pushed this entry to the front of my brain – read it! Open Access News

There is a great overview of the history and current status of the Open CourseWare (OCW) project at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Of interest is the discussion on why to spend millions of dollars to provide free access to that which is a core product of the university.  As with many things (news, music, information), the answer to this will be found in some sort of balance.  I suspect that MIT will profit (and not only financially) from this effort in the end, probably many times over.

from Open Access News

The open coursework offered by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health has been translated into Chinese and made available for study in China.

The effort was headed by Lucifer Chu (perhaps best known for translating The Lord of the Rings into Chinese) using a program called Opensource Opencourseware Prototype System (OOPS).  This signals an internationalization of open access, with many potential benefits for teaching and learning.

An excellent article about the work done by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), including how they worked with their libraries on the project, can be found here.

from Open Access News