Table Of ContentInternational Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012 27
Are E-Books Making Us Stupid?
Why Electronic Collections Mean Trouble
for Libraries and Their Patrons
Nancy McCormack, Queen’s University, Canada
ABSTRACT
In 2008, Nicholas Carr published a provocative article titled “Is Google making us stupid?” in which he
ponders the effect of the internet and electronic sources generally on the brain. This paper discusses one
source specifically, e-books, and explores whether libraries are acting wisely by moving from print to elec-
tronic book collections. The topic is considered from the vantage point of the library and from that of the
patron. Specifically, the prospect of an all or largely all e-book future is considered and whether that future
means an end to traditional library collections and services. The potential problems for “deep reading” are
also considered, and, specifically, whether e-books can serve as an adequate substitute for patrons who will
no longer be able to use electronic collections in the way they once used print. In short, this paper explores
whether e-books are making us—librarians and patrons—stupid.
Keywords: Digitalization, Effects of Electronic Books, Electronic Books (E-Books), Electronic Collections,
Libraries
INTRODUCTION discussions with friends and acquaintances, he
noted a similar phenomenon—they confessed
In 2008, Nicholas Carr published a provocative to an inability to “stay focused on long pieces
article entitled “Is Google making us stupid?” of writing.”
in which he ponders the effect of the internet A recent study by scholars at University
on the brain. “As the media theorist Marshall College London, apparently supported his in-
McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s,” Carr formal observations. Computer logs which kept
writes, “media are not just passive channels of track of what a number of researchers were doing
information. They supply the stuff of thought, when consulting online journal articles, e-books,
but they also shape the process of thought” and other electronic sources of written informa-
(Carr, 2008). Specifically, Carr wondered if tion revealed that the researchers in question
his own extensive use of the Internet had been were exhibiting “’a form of skimming activity,’
chipping away at his ability to contemplate hopping from one source to another and rarely
and concentrate; he also wondered whether or returning to any source they’d already visited.
not he was alone in this. Indeed, in his casual [The subjects] typically read no more than one
or two pages of an article or book before they
would ‘bounce’ out to another site” (Carr, 2008).
DOI: 10.4018/jdls.2012040104
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
28 International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012
Since concentration and focus have traditionally we are doing is ultimately good for patrons,
been regarded as traits necessary for intellectual particularly those who are thereby forced to
and scholarly activity, Carr wonders whether use e-materials for research and study. There
electronic media might somehow be antithetical is also remarkably little discussion on whether
to such essential activities. it is good for libraries.
Studies such as that emanating from Uni- Eric Hellman, former director of OCLC
versity College, in addition to a widespread (Online Computer Library Center) New Jersey,
nagging sense that users are no longer reading is one of the few voices in the wilderness on this
in the way that they once did, recently prompted matter. “It’s frustrating to a number of us in the
Eric Schmidt, the 54-year-old chief executive library business that libraries are mostly sitting
and chairman of Google to express his concern on the sidelines while technology is tipping
that young people growing up in the mobile and towards e-books,” he writes (Hellman, 2010a).
instant information age might indeed experience Hellman believes that libraries may not even
problems with “deep reading.” “’As the world be able to lend books in the future, particularly
looks to these instantaneous devices... you spend given the roadblocks thrown up by publishers
less time reading all forms of literature, books, in this new regime. Indeed, some publishers
magazines and so forth,’ he told the World are now refusing to supply any of the e-books
Economic Forum in Davos. ‘That probably has they produce to libraries.
an effect on cognition, probably has an effect The “Annoyed Librarian,” columnist for
on reading’” (Google, 2010). Library Journal.com (it’s ironic and telling
Schmidt’s intuition about the effect on read- that we have to depend on electronic media to
ing is supported by a number of studies which supply the needed critical assessments of the
indicate that we read online in a way which is problem) has also weighed on the future of
different from the way we read print. Accord- libraries in the world of e-books. Once books
ing to Maryanne Wolf, at Tufts University (and are only available digitally, she notes,
quoted by Carr), “We are not only what we read.
We are how we read.” Reading online materials, We’ll have a situation where libraries are useful
she explains, results in a reading style which only as cash cows for publishers, and content is
privileges “efficiency” and “immediacy” over controlled, organized, and made available only
deep reading and makes us “‘mere decoders as the publishers wish. Forget about selection,
of information.’ Our ability to interpret text, because it won’t be possible anymore. Librar-
to make the rich mental connections that form ies will take the packages of books on offer, or
when we read deeply and without distraction, they won’t. Publishers will realize that there’s
remains largely disengaged” (Carr, 2008). Wolf no point in pretending to sell individual books
analyses the situation further: “Because we since they’re just licensing content now. They’ll
literally and physiologically can read in mul- be doing the selection for libraries, take it or
tiple ways, how we read—and what we absorb leave it. There will be e-book packages based
from our reading—will be influenced by both on obscure categories whose main purpose is
the content of our reading and the medium we to make money. There will be “academic” and
use” (Wolf, 2010). “public” packages, but with enough missing
Clearly, this unease on the part of some from each that libraries will have to buy both
scholars has implications for libraries. The to have even remotely comprehensive collec-
move towards the digitization of journals tions. There will also be current files and back
has been underway for decades, and the next files and every other possible way of dividing
wave—e-books—is here. Yet, as we discard up the available books to make the most money
print and head toward an electronic collection of from them. No matter what libraries try to do,
monographs, there is almost a profound silence they’ll end up paying for a lot of junk they
from information professionals on whether what
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012 29
don’t want so they can get the bit they do want. preloaded devices and it was anticipated that
(Annoyed, 2010) that number would double in the near future.
Public libraries were ahead of academic
Librarians have always favoured the idea libraries in terms of circulating books on pre-
of information being made freely available to loaded devices; the survey revealed that 15%
their patrons, but publishers are intent on making were already doing just that. They were slightly
information pay. “Which group do you think behind in other respects; 82% of public libraries
will win?” the Annoyed Librarian asks. surveyed said that they offered access to e-books
The purpose of the present paper is to (compared to the 95% rate for academic libraries
examine whether libraries are acting wisely in mentioned above). Public library respondents
their race to adopt e-books. It will explore this anticipated that their e-book budget would make
topic from two vantage points—from that of the up about 8% of their total budget in the next
library and from that of the patron. Specifically, five years (Miller, 2011).
it will consider the questions: are libraries do- The survey revealed a definitive move on
ing a service to their patrons and themselves as the part of libraries toward e-books. What the
they move from paper to digital formats or are survey didn’t measure, however, was the extent
they promoting the end of deep reading and, to which embracing the e-book also involved
ultimately, of libraries themselves, as some ob- a concomitant rejection of print--another
servers suggest? The paper will go on to discuss trend recently observed in libraries. At the
the possibility of whether an all or largely all University of Texas-San Antonio, for example,
e-book future will bring an end to traditional a new library opened with study rooms and
library collections and services, harming both computers but no books (Chen, 2010) while
libraries and patrons in the process. It will also at the University of Phoenix, print was out
explore whether e-books themselves provide an and e-books were adopted almost exclusively
adequate substitute for researchers and scholars (Nelson, 2008). Along similar lines, in August
who depend on library resources and who are 2010, Stanford University’s new engineering
no longer able to use them in the way they once library opened with 85% fewer books than it
used books. In short, this paper will explore once had. When asked about the future of the
whether e-books are making us—librarians library, Stanford library director Michael Keller
and patrons—stupid. said that eventually there would be no books at
all—everything would, instead, be available in
digital form (Sydell, 2010).
A. E-BOOKS AND LIBRARIES Stanford is not the only library to do this
type of thing. Higher education and corporate
1. Adoption of E-Books
research libraries have been specifically identi-
fied as being leaders in e-book adoption over
In 2011, Library Journal published the results
the next several years (Wilkie, 2008; Nelson
of a survey which confirmed what most people
2008), and high schools and elementary schools
already knew--that e-books were becoming
are already leading the charge. One private high
much more prevalent in libraries of all types.
school in Massachusetts, for example, recently
The 2011 E-book Penetration & Use in U.S.
removed all the books from its library replacing
Libraries Survey revealed that most academic
them with computers and Kindles (Carr, 2011).
libraries (95%) had e-books in their collections
More dramatically, in May 2011, the Florida
and expected their e-book budget to be close
legislature passed an education bill (Senate
to 20% of their total budget within the next
Bill 2120: K-12 Education Funding) which set
five years (Miller, 2011). Twelve percent of
up a timeline for educators to move from print
the academic libraries which responded to the
to digital textbooks. The provisions of the Act
survey noted that they circulated e-books on
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
30 International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012
require paper textbooks to be replaced with numerous reservations have been expressed
virtual versions by the 2015-16 school year. about this situation by members of the library
The reasons for dumping print and embrac- profession, but the genie appears to be out of the
ing electronic books wholesale are, to some bottle: despite the concerns, the 2011 E-book
extent, obvious: library patrons have grown Penetration & Use in U.S. Libraries Survey
accustomed to finding things online at any predicts significant growth in e-book adoption
time via the Internet, and are looking for the over the next five years.
same type of convenience in libraries through
the instant delivery of library material. Propo- 2. Technical and Collection Issues
nents of e-books refer to their 24-hour-a-day
Public, school, academic and other types of
online availability (particularly significant for
libraries all appear to have embraced the e-
part-time students and distance education) as a
book phenomenon according to e-book use and
well as searchability along with other electronic
penetration surveys. Even so, the technology
bells and whistles.
through which these electronic books operate
The advantages for libraries of acquiring
is in flux and various technical issues present
e-books are, to some extent, also clear. E-books
great difficulties. For example, there is no
do not take up space, and any space formerly
single format for the e-book. Instead, e-books
used by books can be re-purposed as additional
exist in multiple formats and can be read from
lounging, study or reading space for patrons.
one and sometimes multiple devices including
Not unimportantly, in an era of shrinking staff
on a computer screen, on an e-book reader, or
complements, e-books do not need to be checked
on an iPhone. Some e-books exist merely as a
out by circulation staff, nor do they require
.pdf version of a book in print. Others exist in
re-shelving. E-books are not physical objects
a far more elaborate form with built-in refer-
and therefore do not require binding, repair or
ence materials (dictionaries, encyclopedia-like
re-ordering when they are damaged or stolen.
entries), audio-visual components and various
Additionally, libraries no longer have to worry
interactive elements. Commentators compare
about charging and collecting fines and dealing
these early e-book formats to the early days
with books which are not returned.
of videotape in which the VHS and Betamax
Perhaps what is most appealing to the
formats waged war for some time until VHS
more idealistic information professionals, and
edged out Betamax to become the standard home
librarians in particular, is the notion of books
videotape system. At the moment, there is no
being more widely available to patrons, and
clear indication that e-books and their reading
from any one of a number of devices.
devices will evolve and eventually settle on a
The problem with this appearance of wider
single type and format.
access, however, is that as it is expanded, it is
The expectation, nonetheless, is that certain
also restricted, and libraries have to surrender
standards will emerge for the technology; what
the type of control they once had when dealing
that will look like, though, is still the subject of
with physical items. In the past, libraries rarely,
much debate. Clearly, at the moment, the market
if ever, were required to sign a contract when
has not settled enough for a universal file format
buying a physical book. Today, contracts are par
to emerge, and this has caused some problems
for the course when libraries acquire e-books,
in terms of an even more comprehensive adop-
and most of these contracts shift control heavily
tion of e-books. Indeed, when librarians are
in favour of the publisher. These controls are
surveyed regarding the problems they encounter
over and above the general laws which govern
in dealing with e-books, they generally mention
copyright and digital rights, and often take away
the sheer number of platforms, some of which
the rights permitted by these general laws for
are difficult to use, and e-materials which are
the use of copyrighted material in certain set-
difficult to read (Connaway, 2007).
tings such as education or research. Certainly,
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012 31
Another problem is overlap of titles, a or send certain titles to storage. In contrast,
problem libraries first encountered with the e-books and e-book packages are generally
introduction of electronic journals. In the case able to provide usage statistics. Ironically,
of e-books, although some titles may be avail- given that many of the titles require an annual
able for purchase individually, many are only renewal, librarians will feel obliged to consult
available via subject-based packages of titles and compare these usage statistics annually and
(containing often hundreds of books) or cross- across years in order to determine whether to
publisher packages. renew certain titles or packages.
Subject-based packages include titles in a Of course, librarians will not be the only
particular area (e.g., history) from any one of a group consulting statistics. Publishers will un-
number of publishers. Cross-publisher packages doubtedly also track usage, where they can, to
are packages which are the titles printed by one determine by how much the cost of an annual
or more publishers offered en masse regardless subscription might be increased, particularly
of their subject matter. For those librarians who when packages with popular titles are involved.
have studied the content of these types of pack- Cost, of course, will become a major
ages, overlap is already apparent, particularly in problem--keeping track of the myriad of pricing,
packages such as ebrary, Academic Complete, perpetual access and licensing models (Fisher,
Knovel, Elsevier’s MD Consult and so on (Stern 2010). New and creative fees which could never
2010). This means that libraries have to pay have been foreseen in the world of print are
for the same titles over and over again. This is now being introduced. As David Stern notes,
particularly galling when these packages also
contain older titles which already exist in hard Libraries traditionally paid for books as one
copy on the shelves. time purchase or as parts of standing order
Administrators often believe that electronic sets. There were no platform fees, aggrega-
titles mean less work for Technical Services tor fees, third-party support costs or annual
departments or other library operations. This maintenance fees. In many systems, there is no
is not necessarily the case. For example, titles way to show and account for such continuation
in e-book packages can drop out of packages commitments. There are also few options to
from one contract to the next. New titles may handle and reflect multiple seat charge options,
also be added. This means constant adjustments revised charges based on use data, reserves use
must be made to the catalogue. Even in cases fees (as a short-term option or as a permanent
where vendors supply cataloguing records, there right), or storage of use data and continuation
is always troubleshooting, customizing or ad- decision histories (Stern, 2010, p. 31).
ditional work to be done. Continual follow-up
and monitoring is needed, particularly where
Such is the brave new world of libraries,
links cease to work or platforms are not func-
e-materials, and publishers. Publishers, in par-
tioning as they should.
ticular, understand that never in their history
As a result, even if library departments are
has there been a time like this for maximizing
no longer dealing with books in their physical
profits. It is an opportunity which did not exist
form, the switch to e-books does not necessarily
in the print world. At the same time, they are
lessen the strain on workloads. In addition to all
quite aware that they must not frighten away too
of the above, librarians will also be required to
much business or price themselves entirely out
perform more yearly analyses of use data than
of the market. As a result, at this time loosely
they once did. In the past, librarians only felt
termed “experiments” with price are common,
obliged to look annually at how often physical
while publishers and libraries work out what
books had been consulted or circulated if they
the product will ultimately cost.
were determining whether to weed collections
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
32 International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012
3. Price resource (regardless of whether they actually do
or not) (Spalding, 2009). As one commentator
Price is yet another area where it might be argued notes, “E-books will be expensive, just like
libraries are acting quite unwisely. In the past, they are now. Has anyone priced a scholarly
when a library bought a book, it often paid the book for the Kindle? Forget that $9.99 stuff.
same price as any other individual buyer. But $70 is more like it, because scholarly books are
the library got far more use out of the book than priced for libraries, not individuals” (Annoyed
the individual because, in theory, an unlimited Librarian, 2010).
number of people could borrow and read it. The Of course, there is no guarantee that an e-
library, in essence, had undisputed property book will be available as a one-time purchase.
rights over the book as a physical object. It could Instead, access to the book in question might
lend the book as many times as the book could only be available via an annual fee, similar to
physically withstand being lent. The library paying rent for an apartment. By this method
could then throw out the book, or burn it, or “libraries will be transformed into “simple”
give it away, or sell it, or take it to pieces and book-subsidy machines, not the special, advan-
use it for papier-mâché. In the United States, taged ones they are now. That means they’re
the legal foundation for this situation was the either…forced to subscribe to fewer books,
“first sale doctrine” established by the U.S. invest a lot more in their holdings or, for public
Supreme Court in 1908 in Bobbs-Merrill Co. libraries, convince voters to give them a lot
v. Straus, 210 U.S. 339. The first sale doctrine more money. Those are bad options” (Spalding,
placed a limit on copyright: it did not require 2010). The other implied possibility is that the
the purchaser of a book, whether a library or minute the yearly fee can’t be paid, access will
an individual, to obtain permission from the disappear entirely.
copyright holder to sell or give the book away. Similarly, a secondary market for e-books
This gave the library or the individual the same will not be allowed to exist, since contracts
rights more or less with respect to the physical entered into for the sale of digital material
book as one would have regarding any other typically prohibit the transfer of the electronic
physical object such as a lamp. book to anyone else. Ownership is no longer a
Consequently, if a library wanted to buy certainty, and even when a library is permitted
a new book and found that book to be too to “own” rather than rent the virtual book, that
expensive, it could then look to the used book form of ownership lacks many of the same rights
market and buy a copy at a cheaper price. If accorded to the owner of a physical book. In
the book was no longer in print, the buyer addition, higher prices are virtually guaranteed
could also purchase the desired title from the because the publishing model is monopolistic.
used book market. Prices were kept in check There will be no used book stores for virtual
because publishers generally found it unwise books, on the scale that they exist for print.
to price discriminate; if they did, the second- Given that so much of this brave new
ary market provided other options to the buyer world is still in flux, publishers have been
(Spalding, 2009). experimenting with various payment models.
This is not the case with e-books. While dis- Some are uncontroversial while others have
tributors such as Amazon might attempt to keep caused a greater stir. In 2010, for example,
prices of e-books for the general market lower HarperCollins announced to libraries that “new
(and not without great resistance from publishers titles licensed from library e-book vendors
(Abell, 2010), libraries will be obliged to pay [would] be able to circulate only 26 times be-
more for the material they buy from publishers fore the license expire[d]” (Hardo, 2011). The
based largely on the assumption that multiple publisher explained to Library Journal that the
individuals will have the opportunity to use the number 26 had been arrived at based on what
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012 33
the publisher believed was the average lifespan site licences can be monopolistic. Yet, monopoly
of a book given the wear and tear involved in aside, other difficulties with the model are also
typical library lending (Hardo, 2011). obvious--the same material is paid for over and
Librarians, in response, argued that the over and over again. During difficult times when
number was totally arbitrary. Some traditional libraries need to tighten their belts, access will
books, for example, are circulated far more inevitably vanish (Spalding, 2009).
often than 26 times before they wear out. Not Shifting content of packages of books
only that, but the number is also meaningless which distributors choose to offer is yet another
given the fact that one of the attributes of e- reason for concern. In the print world, when
books is that they are supposed not to wear a library has purchased a book, it remains in
out (Public Enemies, 2011). The controversy, the collection until it is physically discarded.
however, highlighted the fact that pricing and Not so in the virtual world. Books which were
access models are contentious matters, and that available yesterday are quite capable of disap-
publishers have far more power in the virtual pearing today.
world than they did in the world of print. Take the case of the University of Toronto
(U of T) Press. In January 2012, U of T Press,
4. Access which had numerous titles in the e Canadian
Publishers Collection (one of three collections in
In the e-book world, “access” has really, for the
the Canadian Electronic Library (CEL)), chose
most part, taken the place of ownership; hence,
to withdraw its content which consisted of cur-
in the case of libraries, publishers have been
rent titles along with a recent backlist (close to
experimenting with offering a variety of forms of
600 titles). The reason had to do with changes
access. One model offered, for instance, is “per-
which had been made to the e-book platform,
petual access” in which the book in electronic
ebrary, through which the Canadian Publishers
format remains on the publisher’s computers,
Collection is available. In 2011, ebrary made
and library patrons may access that book via
some changes to its software which would allow
a link in the library catalogue which leads to
users to “borrow” the electronic titles by being
the publisher’s site, presumably in perpetuity,
able to download them to portable devices. The
without necessitating further fees being paid by
University of Toronto Press was worried that
the library. The big and questionable assumption
this type of “borrowing” would have an impact
is, of course, that the publisher itself stays in
on print sales. In response, it withdrew all its
business “in perpetuity.”
titles. On the heels of this, three other university
Yet another model is the “ownership”
publishers--McGill-Queen’s University Press,
model, whereby the file is transferred from the
Wilfred Laurier University Press and University
publisher to the computer servers of the library
of British Columbia Press--did the same.
or library consortium. This type of e-ownership
Because of this action by the publishers,
does not depend on the continuing existence
professors at various Canadian institutions
of the publisher. Nevertheless, the full rights
who had intended to incorporate books from
of ownership—the ability to sell, transfer or
these various university presses into their read-
give away—are still absent (Spalding, 2009).
ing lists for courses suddenly found that their
Libraries which cannot afford perpetual
home institution was without a copy. Libraries
access or which are not offered the “ownership”
scrambled to buy physical copies or to find
option will end up with the cable TV model––
access to the material in some other way. But
paying for annual access to books rather than
a very worrisome message had been sent: that
owning them. Access is generally through a site
publishers could withdraw material without
licence which allows either unlimited access or
consultation and without any regard to the
access by a certain number of users at a time to
institutions they might affect and the resulting
books made available through the library. These
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
34 International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012
chaos they might create if the terms of access unwilling or unable to rock the boat. For ex-
no longer suited them. ample, libraries who had originally intended to
In 2011, another dispute about ownership join in with a boycott on publishers who would
and access made the news in Kansas. The Digital not sell or licence e-content at all, backed down
Library Consortium in that State learned that and changed their position on the HarperCol-
OverDrive, a digital content distributor was lins’ 26-Loan cap on e-books. In response, the
about to raise its license fees by almost 700% Annoyed Librarian commented,
over the next few years. The Kansas Digital
Library Consortium assumed, given the terms Librarians are so desperate for e-books they
of the contract with OverDrive, that they owned don’t care what the deal is. Libraries are ac-
the digital titles and could continue to access the tually stopping their boycott of HarperCollins
titles even if they moved to a new distributor. e-books because HarperCollins is willing to
In response, OverDrive claimed that the Kansas let libraries pay them for e-books when other
Digital Library Consortium did not own the publishers won’t. The lesson? Libraries have no
titles and would lose all access if they did not clout when it comes to e-books and they’ll take
renew their contract. a bad deal over no deal at all. Good bargaining
Surprisingly, the Kansas Attorney Gen- strategy! And let’s be honest, any deal where
eral’s office got involved in the dispute, and libraries are giving publishers money for ac-
decided that the Library did actually own the cess to an e-book that is then loaned out to one
digital books. Kansas State Librarian Joanne library patron at a time as if it was a physical
Budler, determined to make certain that this book is a bad deal. The arbitrary 26-loan cap
was the case, began negotiations with 165 just makes the deal worse. Oh, I know. Library
publishers to negotiate ownership of the titles patrons are demanding e-books! Thus, libraries
(Russell, 2012). As of January 2012, Budler should make whatever bad deal they can to get
had received permission from 73% of the e- them. What library patrons should be demand-
books publishers and 63% of the downloadable ing is that libraries stop spending their money
audiobook publishers to move the content to on e-books that cost more than print books but
new platforms. Some of the publishers asked come with the same usage limitations. Library
for additional money to agree to the content patrons should be asking, why are we spending
shift but Budler refused to pay. It was her money on e-book titles and I still have to wait
opinion that the titles were already owned and for 38 other people to read this book before I
that additional fees could not be charged. It is can check it out? (Annoyed, 2012)
unclear whether those publishers relented; what
is clear, however, is that twenty publishers did
What is perhaps the biggest blow to librar-
not respond at all (Budler, 2012).
ies and the reason why they might be willing
Perhaps more alarming is that some pub-
to take any deal even if it’s a bad one, is this:
lishers refuse to deal with libraries at all on the
publishers are beginning to signal that they don’t
matter or digital content. In February 2012, the
need libraries at all, given this new model. As
San Rafael Public Library posted a notice which
one observer has noted, “There is a very real
said the following “These publishers refuse to
possibility that the ability of libraries to lend
sell or licence e-books to Libraries: MacMillan
books will not survive this transformation. The
Publishing, Simon & Schuster, Penguin Group,
big publishers don’t see libraries as a big part
Brilliance Audio, Hachette Book Group. Think
of their market; some publishers are openly
that’s wrong? We do” (Librarian in Black,
hostile towards libraries” (Hellman, 2010a). It
2012). The library urged patrons to contact
is not inconceivable that publishers might offer
these publishers and complain.
electronic versions of their materials online,
The San Rafael Public Library, however,
either individually or through some Amazon-
is something of an outlier; most libraries seem
type clearing house, thus circumventing libraries
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012 35
altogether. While the notion might once have ments. Now, however, the contracts which must
seemed farfetched, a world in which publish- be signed by libraries in order to have access
ers do not offer e-books to libraries is already to e-books narrows or even overrides these
beginning to evolve and libraries have actually copyright law exceptions, and often there is little
been co-opted into the maneuver that will make that can be done about negotiating new contract
them redundant. terms. Unless an institution or organization has
a tremendous amount of power, most licensing
5. Copyright agreements are of a “take it or leave it” nature,
and if libraries want access to e-books, they
In the past, the use of a physical book after its
have no choice but to take it.
purchase was governed by copyright legislation
and any cases which interpreted that legisla- 6. Interlibrary Loans
tion. The advent of electronic journals changed
this somewhat--libraries had to learn how and In addition to the problems presented by price,
whether the content of electronic journals access and copyright, libraries now have to
could be printed, downloaded, emailed, shared, confront the inevitable problem of whether their
accessed yearly or in perpetuum. Often, this interlibrary loan services are likely to survive
depended on the provisions of various contracts the new world of e-books. Traditionally, when
that libraries had signed with the vendors of patrons needed a library book which was not
electronic journals in order to obtain access. No available at their home library, that library was
two contracts were alike, and libraries which able to borrow a physical copy from another
subscribed to packages of journals from a range library on behalf of their patrons. A book would
of publishers generally used spreadsheets and be loaned for a short time to patron, and once
other software packages to keep track of the that time had run out, the library with whom the
terms for each of these packages in order not to patron was affiliated would send the book back
violate any contracts. Nonetheless, over time, to the library from which it had been borrowed.
certain patterns began to emerge and libraries The movement towards e-books has already
grew more comfortable with e-journal licens- changed and will continue to change the nature
ing requirements and obligations. This did not and extent of interlibrary loan. When a library
eliminate the need for spreadsheets, it only purchases e-books or decides to subscribe to
meant that libraries grew more familiar with an e-book package, the publisher generally
what they could not do with the new format. requires that a contract be signed which outlines
The case with e-books is much more the terms of use--including terms regarding
complicated. Compared to the e-journal mar- interlibrary loans.
ketplace, licenses for e-books are in a much Now the fact is that publishers are, for
greater state of flux (Horava, 2009). Just as the most part, not at all interested in allowing
they did with electronic journals, libraries will patrons from other institutions or libraries to
be required to keep the same detailed spread- access electronic books purchased by a par-
sheets and databases regarding their various ticular library. Indeed, as John Sargent, CEO
contractual obligations. As noted before, in of Macmillan one of the largest publishers in
an era of shrinking staff, this is no mean feat. the United States has noted, the very act of
More alarming is that copyright law as it borrowing a book from the library has changed
applies to e-journals and e-books is “trumped by dramatically with the advent of e-books. In the
contractual agreements. We sign license agree- past, he notes, borrowing a book from the library
ments that erode various user rights” (Horava, meant more work for all concerned. The patron
2009). Copyright laws restrict how intellectual had to go to an actual library to pick up the
property may be used, but exceptions generally book. If the book was not available, the library
exist in education or in certain research environ- had to take additional steps to make sure that
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
36 International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 3(2), 27-47, April-June 2012
the patron could eventually have access—often dents were allowed to choose more than one
this meant borrowing the book from another answer) revealed that 87% went to libraries to
library: interlibrary loan. either borrow or to browse books. Another 54%
Of course, that was at a time when, for said they were looking for a quiet place in which
example, books wore out and libraries would to study. Given that a much smaller percentage
purchase additional copies to replace those goes to the library specifically to study rather
which were no longer able to physically cir- than find books, the “finding seems to fly in
culate. However, with the advent of e-books, the face of current library orthodoxy that if we
Sargent comments, add group study and relaxing between classes
the proportion appreciating the qualities of the
…you sit on your couch in your living room physical space increases significantly. The big
and go to the library website, see if the library question of course that needs asking is whether
has it, maybe you check libraries in three other the provision of e-books will trigger the flight
states. You get the book, read it, return it and of students from the physical library space?”
get another, all without paying a thing. “It’s like (Nicholas, 2008a).
Netflix, but you don’t pay for it. How is that a Surely we must at least consider the pos-
good model for us?” [Sargent says].”If there’s sibility suggested by the survey: if patrons have
a model where the publisher gets a piece of the access to books via their local library’s catalogue
action every time the book is borrowed, that’s online, will they bother to visit the library itself
an interesting model.” (Hellman, 2010b) anymore? Will libraries then be able to justify
the space they occupy? Even more worrisome-
-will publishers eventually offer e-book access
Thus, the e-book revolution has given
directly to users without seeing the necessity of
publishers an unprecedented amount of control
going through libraries? (Wilkie 2008). If so,
over the material they are selling. Naturally, like
how are libraries to survive?
all entrepreneurial bodies they are interested
in limiting, not increasing, access, if there is
no advantage to them (Russell, 2012). This
B. E-BOOKS AND PATRONS
according to the Annoyed Librarian means the
end of Interlibrary Loan: 1. Advantages and
Disadvantages of the Medium
Once everything is available only in digital
content and by license only, why would pub- At first glance, e-books, from the patron’s point
lishers allow ILL? If a library patron wants of view, might seem heaven sent. Proponents
a book, the library can purchase the book, or extol, for instance, the virtues of 24 hour ac-
rather, the library can subscribe to the pack- cess; indeed, an ebrary study conducted in 2008
age that will allow the patron to temporarily revealed that 24-hour anywhere access was
view the book. Maybe they’ll be able to “rent” the feature which students valued most about
temporary access instead of “purchase” “per- e-books (ebrary, 2008). Patrons have also said
manent” access. I can just imagine the publish- that they value searchability (Levine-Clark,
ers chuckling over an arrangement like that.” 2008), the ability to cut and paste (Hernon,
(Annoyed Librarian) 2007), and added-value content such as built
in reference works which help to illuminate the
text. Unlike print books which, at best, may be a
Other observers have wondered, however,
combination of text and static pictures, e-books
whether it means more than merely the end to
can combine text, static visual images, moving
interlibrary loan. In other words, aren’t libraries
images, video, and audio.
themselves in jeopardy? A recent survey which
Updates to an e-book may be sent elec-
asked students why they went to libraries (stu-
tronically by the publisher and downloaded
Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
