[927] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
DeLorme's Street Atlas
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (RHADDEN%USGSRESV.BITNET@ricevm1.ri)
Wed Aug 5 19:35:04 1992
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1992 18:26:03 CDT
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
From: RHADDEN%USGSRESV.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu
To: Multiple recipients of list PACS-L <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
A licensing agreement that states that the information cannot be shown to
anyone outside of the employees of the business or "publically displaying"
the infromation is intimidating. However, just because a publisher says
that the information can be used only in this one way, does not make that
either enforceable or legally correct. Once it is purchased, the publisher
cannot limit the audience. They certainly cannot limit the audience based
on race, gender, etc.
Libraries should either ifXX ignore or provaXXX provoke a test case on
publishers of this knowledge/information. Publishers that do not sell
to libraries are willing to lose business- good for them. Let then go broke, sin
ce I am not in favor of supporting publishers who discriminate
against libraries, either by trying to control them post-sales, or with
two-tiered pricing.
Lee Haddenn
