Statement on the Sieghart e-lending review

(Image c/o P^2 – Paul on Flickr.)

Voices for the Library broadly welcomes the “Independent Review of E-Lending in Public Libraries in England” written by William Sieghart, Chair of the Review panel. We hope that this report paves the way for greater collaboration between library authorities, publishers and other interested parties, as well as reinforcing the crucial role libraries must play in our digital future.

The report outlines a number of key recommendations:

  1. The lending of ebooks should be a service provided free of charge.
  2. Library members should be able to borrow digital books from their libraries remotely.
  3. Each copy of a digital book should only be loaned to one reader at a time.
  4. Digital copies should be “deemed to deteriorate”.
  5. The Public Lending Right (PLR) should be extended to cover digital, audio and e-audio books.

In submitting our evidence to the Review panel, we argued strongly that ebooks should be offered free of charge to library users.  The core ethos of a public library service is ensuring free access to information for all.  With this in mind, charging for the lending of ebooks was contrary to this core belief.  Ebooks should not be treated any different to print, particularly as there is little evidence to suggest that providing free access has an adverse impact upon ebook (or book) sales.

We also argued strongly that ebooks should be available to download remotely.  Ebooks provide a great opportunity to reach out to those who are unable to access their local library, particularly the housebound.  Ensuring that ebooks can be downloaded remotely ensures that the housebound are empowered to borrow books without having to utilise a surrogate to make their choices for them.  As a result, remote download has the potential to level the playing field in terms of access to information for the housebound and the regular library visitor.

We also accepted that each copy of a digital book should only be loaned to one reader at a time.  It is reasonable to require that libraries purchase multiple ebook editions rather than one copy that can be borrowed by multiple users at the same time.  To insist on the latter, in our view, would be unfair on publishers and book sellers and would, therefore, be an unreasonable demand to make.

We also welcome the move to conduct further research in terms of ebooks in public libraries to gather more evidence on digital lending in the UK.  We look forward to finding out more about the plan for publishers to work with the Society of Chief Librarians, the Arts Council England and The Reading Agency to establish a methodology to address the lack of evidence which will then feed into an agreed national approach for digital lending.

However, whilst we accept many of the recommendations above, we do not accept the premise that digital copies should be “deemed to deteriorate”.  This appears to suggest that an arbitrary number of issues (or time period) would be imposed upon the library authority, requiring a further purchase of a particular ebook.  As our submission clearly set out, an arbitrary figure (like that proposed by HarperCollins in 2011) assumes that all printed book stock has the same life span and usage patterns, which is an unrealistic assumption.

Overall, we are broadly supportive of the recommendations made in Sieghart’s report.  Whilst we are disappointed that more of our recommendations weren’t adopted, we accept that they were perhaps too radical to be considered at this stage.  We are pleased, however, that the recommendation we (and others) made to extend the PLR has been endorsed and we accept the majority of the recommendations made, despite our reservations about digital copies being “deemed to deteriorate”.  We hope that this report paves the way for a constructive way forward and we look forward to greater co-operation between library authorities and publishers in the future.

 

5 thoughts on “Statement on the Sieghart e-lending review

  1. Mick Fortune

    Yes indeed, there is much to welcome in the report although I confess to being slightly underwhelmed by the government’s response. Legislation? Maybe, when there’s time. Money for e-PLR? Economic climate permitting…

    But perhaps it would be wildly optimistic – even irresponsible – to expect more.

    But much as I applaud the solid analysis and creative thinking that has clearly been deployed in considering business models I feel that the task of establishing the infrastructure that will be required for ANY future e-lending service has been overlooked.

    Since there is no mention in either the report or the government’s response to developing library standards for delivery one anticipates that these will once again be left to the market to decide. With several competing services already active on both sides of the Atlantic – and more to come from mainland Europe in the very near future – the likelihood is that the guardians of the public library service will face considerable technological challenges in making their choices – of suppliers, formats and platforms. Incompatibility and a consequent lack of interoperability, could be just as big a challenge – if not bigger – as the different tag data models and content the UK chose to use for RFID (to choose an example at random.)

    And just as libraries that invested in RFID are slowly coming to realise that there are disadvantages in letting market forces determine limitations on service provision, a similar approach to e-lending will limit readers’ options if content is not available cross-platform.

    Being somewhat dependent on the expertise and knowledge of locally focused council IT departments librarians in the public sector need both an international perspective and national leadership. The recent overtures from the SCL toward BIC offer some grounds for optimism in both areas but I worry that the challenge of connecting a technologically complex and global market to a local authority managed service may prove to be a bridge too far.

    Time for a national skills agency perhaps?

    Reply
  2. Pingback: Independent Sieghart review of e-lending in public libraries published | Alyson's Welsh libraries blog

  3. Pingback: Round up | Alan Gibbons' Diary

  4. Pingback: Libraries News Round-up: 28th March 2013 | The Library Campaign

  5. Pingback: Ebooks: UK Government Commission Releases Review of E-Lending in Public Libraries | LJ INFOdocket

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *