I suppose it's not breaking news that libraries and archives aren't flush with cash. So it must be hard for a director of such an institution when a large corporation, or even a relatively small one, comes knocking with an offer to digitize one's holdings in exchange for some kind of commercial rights to the contents. But as a historian worried about open access to our cultural heritage, I'm a little concerned about the new agreement between Footnote, Inc. and the United States National Archives. And I'm surprised that somehow this agreement has thus far flown under the radar of all of those who attacked the troublesome Smithsonian/Showtime agreement. Guess what? From now until 2012 it will cost you $100 a year, or even more offensively, $1.99 a page, for online access to critical historical documents such as the Papers of the Continental Congress.
This was the agreement signed by Archivist of the United States Allen Weinstein and Footnote, Inc., a Utah-based digital archives company, on January 10, 2007. For the next five years, unless you have the time and money to travel to Washington, you'll have to fork over money to Footnote to take a peek at Civil War pension documents or the case files of the early FBI. The National Archives says this agreement is "non-exclusive"—I suppose crossing their fingers that Google will also come along and make a deal—but researchers shouldn't hold their breaths for other options.
Read more from Dan Cohen at:
http://www.dancohen.org/blog/posts/national_archives_footnote_agreement
It's a sad message for Open access advocates. Let us hope that a lot of people who are buying access are ignoring the "terms of use" by making the Public Domain content free on other servers.
More information (and critical points) at the Spellbound blog:
http://www.spellboundblog.com/2007/01/17/footnotecom-and-us-national-archives-records/
Short critical comment:
http://freegovinfo.info/node/858
This was the agreement signed by Archivist of the United States Allen Weinstein and Footnote, Inc., a Utah-based digital archives company, on January 10, 2007. For the next five years, unless you have the time and money to travel to Washington, you'll have to fork over money to Footnote to take a peek at Civil War pension documents or the case files of the early FBI. The National Archives says this agreement is "non-exclusive"—I suppose crossing their fingers that Google will also come along and make a deal—but researchers shouldn't hold their breaths for other options.
Read more from Dan Cohen at:
http://www.dancohen.org/blog/posts/national_archives_footnote_agreement
It's a sad message for Open access advocates. Let us hope that a lot of people who are buying access are ignoring the "terms of use" by making the Public Domain content free on other servers.
More information (and critical points) at the Spellbound blog:
http://www.spellboundblog.com/2007/01/17/footnotecom-and-us-national-archives-records/
Short critical comment:
http://freegovinfo.info/node/858
KlausGraf - am Freitag, 19. Januar 2007, 18:54 - Rubrik: English Corner
KlausGraf meinte am 2007/01/20 02:22:
Comment by Suber
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2007_01_14_fosblogarchive.html#116924255496730320Worth reading also:
http://forums.archivists.org/read/messages?id=2165
KlausGraf meinte am 2007/02/09 11:47:
More on the deal
http://www.dancohen.org/blog/posts/a_closer_look_at_the_national_archives-footnote_agreement
