I wrote a post about the BookChaser Editions service last year, but encountered a reference to another service they offer, and this led me to others:

• BookChaser Covers : compares cover images available from Amazon, Google Books, LibraryThing, and Open Library.
• BookChaser BookInfo : compares information about a book obtained from Amazon, Google Books, ISBNDB, Library of Congress, LibraryThing, Open Library, and WorldCat.
• ISBN Analysis Tool : compares x-ISBN-like service availability for a given ISBN obtained from Amazon, Google Books, LibraryThing and WorldCat.

All lookup services are by ISBN.

Open Solutions for Libraries Gain Momentum is an article on Information Today which gives an excellent overview of the current state of library data and sharing.  Not only does it present the current struggle with OCLC’s licensing efforts with a fair approach, it also presents the up-and-coming players such as LibLime, Open Library and biblios.net.

This is one of those articles that is good for updating those not deeply involved in libraryland.

found via LISNews

Karen Coyle wrote an excellent post about OCLC’s delayed implementation of the records licensing policy.  An exerpt:

Those of us who promote open access must use this time wisely.

• First, we need to get some solid legal advice. It’s clear that OCLC can propose any kind of conditions in a contract and hope to get signers; it’s less clear that OCLC can impose a contract on members 1) without their explicit agreement 2) that covers data created before the contract becomes valid 3) that binds third parties to the contract.
• Next, anyone who has bibliographic data should release it “into the wild” as quickly as possible. Once the data is circulating, it will not be possible to withdraw it. One solution is to create database dumps and to upload these to the Internet Archive. They will be there for downloading by others, and some of the data may end up in the Open Library. Assuming that bibliographic records cannot be covered by copyright, all of this data ends up in the public domain to fuel innovation and creativity.

If enough people take advantage of this extra time to better understand the copyright issues as well as to provide the data stored in their systems to open repositories, the message that will be sent not only to OCLC but everyone involved with libraries will be this:

We are more interested in services and sharing than in ownership.  Our values and our culture are built from this premise.  Organizations and companies that wish to work with us need to understand this, and they need to provide services and sharing as their top priority.  Since this is what we value, whis is what we will reward.

The debate about OCLC’s revision of their Policy for Use and Transfer of WorldCat Records is heating up.  The core issue appears to be the licensing of WorldCat records and the limitations imposed, namely that “data extracted from a WorldCat Record” cannot be used in anything that “substantially replicates the function, purpose, and/or size of WorldCat”.

Aaron Swartz, with the Open Library project, has posted a really interesting overview of OCLC, although his intro suggests that he feels that the 800 pound gorilla comparison is closer to the mark.  He followed up with quotes from and comments about Karen Calhoun’s post to OCLC members comment from his first post (thanks for setting this straight, Aaron!) He did not have a link to Karen’s post, and I wasn’t able to locate it via a search.

There is a podcast on Panlibus of Karen Calhoun and Roy Tennant discussing the policy.  I haven’t had a chance to listen yet.

Karen did post comments on November 4th on OCLC’s Metalogue blog.  Read the comments, especially Jonathan Rochkind’s (Nov 5, 1:41 p.m.); then check out his own blog posts on the topic (I would link to individual posts, but there are quite a few, and they are all worth reading — scroll back to November 3rd and read forward).

I am still fairly certain that OCLC is taking on the tiger’s role:  territorial and instinctive.  The more thought I give to it, however, the stronger the argument for opening the records and information becomes:  the data doesn’t belong to anyone (and if it did, it would belong to the libraries that created it in the first place) and OCLC is playing a losing game if it insists on full ownership and control.

continued from here…

Evergreen and Project Conifer (John Fink) was a progress report / Q&A session about the installation of the Evergreen ILS for a consortium of academic libraries (McMaster University, University of Windsor, and Laurentian University). John gave a fantastic overview of the project, intended to go live sometime next year. It is a large undertaking, especially considering that they are writing the code for the Acquisitions and Serials areas of the software. He had an observation that I found interesting (and have noticed as well): people using III’s Millennium ILS tend to have a higher opinion of the software than is deserved. It is good, and it works fairly well, but it is deeply flawed, in my opinion. I will add that users of Voyager need to be reminded of the good points of their system now and then, but that it is also flawed. I will say again that Evergreen is going to have a much bigger impact than people realize.

Open Book, a WordPress plugin (John Miedema) was another high-interest session, since I had installed and used the plugin just one week earlier. To discuss the plugin and the reasons behind its functionality and existence with the developer was a great experience. The group discussed Amazon, OCLC, and Google (and their relative restrictions and freedoms) at length. John is a great supporter of the Open Library project, and for good reason.

Metasearch / APIs / Facebook for Libraries (David Fiander, Geoff Sinclair, Me) was a bit of a blur, since I was at the front and trying to think as effectively as possible (more challenging some days than others). I got to discuss my idea (a piece of software that uses an API that is as straightforward as possible, which passes requests to various library and bibliographic systems and returns the results… this could allow search tools and OPAC overlays to work with a standard set of rules, as well as allowing meta-search tools to become more effective), but didn’t feel that any brainstorming actually took place. If someone doesn’t point out a big flaw in my thinking (especially when I am stretching my abilities beyond their comfort zone) I suspect that I am politely being listened to. Maybe not…

The Wrap-up went fine, but there wasn’t a call for action, or a consensus as to what should come next from all of this. I can’t say I expected one, but I was hoping to have some sort of Eureka moment. I did have a strong feeling that I was going to put everything together in an interesting way during the drive home on Saturday, but it didn’t happen that way (keep reading).

We then walked over to the BiblioCommons office for a buffet tray/beer/wine dinner party. I had some great conversations here, and completely forgot to find out what exactly it is that makes people speak of BiblioCommons in reverent tones. There isn’t a lot of information out there beyond it being a “complete social discovery system for libraries” (from their website). People whose opinions I respect are very impressed with it, and I was in a conversation with one of the people directly involved and never asked one question about it. Shame on me!

I ended up skipping the pub night outing, as I stopped by the hotel and felt tired, and spent the time putting pictures online. I went to bed early, and slept very fitfully, until about 4 a.m. That was when the gunshots began. There were 7 ro 8 of them, from at least two guns, sounding like they were just outside the building. I woke at the first shot, rolled out of bed (away from the window) on the second, and duck-walked to the bathroom with my phone as they continued. I was on the third floor, so I don’t think I was likely to get caught in the line of fire (I figure they were either shooting at each other, or shooting into the air). It was a very unpleasant experience, and I didn’t get to sleep for quite a while (and didn’t sleep well then). When my alarm went off, I decided to cancel my sightseeing activities, get some more rest, and leave Toronto straight from the hotel.

So that’s why I didn’t spend the trip thinking about neat library technology and such. Too bad, because this was as good a conference as I have ever attended, and I complimpent John, William and Stacy on their excellent work. I encourage more groups to consider this format (it would work well as part of a standard conference format as well… just set up a block of time, or a conference track, as an unconference).

The Open Library is a project I have been hoping for years that someone would start – an open source universal book catalog.   Think WorldCat meets Wikipedia meets Amazon and you won’t be far off.

So go to their demo site, do a couple of searches.  Their data is sketchy in places, but this means you have an opportunity to try out their editing interface.  I just corrected the title for “John Irving : Three Complete Novels” (you can look at the history for “revision 2″), although my change may not be the final word, as this seems like a possible duplicate.  The wonders of a wiki!

This project, if it grows wings or even legs, will truly remake our digital presence.  From Open Library Numbers (OLNs) to user corrections and additions, this merger of open source and books gives us both freedom and control of our cataloging information.

from Alexis Rossi via Next Generation Catalog for Libraries (ngc4lib) newsgroup