“This is relatively easy to bring up when we’re negotiating licenses for content. It’s a bit harder with open access content because, while we do have agreements with a number of open access publishers that include preservation clauses, there’s a growing amount of open access content where the library doesn’t have direct involvement. Agreement language is therefore incredibly important, and a recent review of license language about digital preservation sadly revealed that the language is often vague about how much of the content is being preserved, for what time, and in what manner that content would be accessed (or what types of uses would be permissible) if circumstances change and the preservation clauses get activated. Often, the language mixes the idea of post-cancellation access (where, because of a license, we have obtained rights over time to access historical content) with long-term digital preservation and access. It’s hard to verify that content is being preserved in the places and manner in which we expect it to be, and even harder to ensure that it is ready for access in the event of the catastrophe that we hope never comes.

As a result, the Smathers Libraries participate in a number of efforts to develop model license language that supports  the work of libraries in negotiating  licenses with publishers, such as the collaborative LIBLICENSE project. In developing this language, we noticed the importance of redundancy to ensure preservation. We’ve all seen situations where having one backup of digital information is simply not enough. So the recommendation that has come forward is that content should be deposited in three mutually trusted digital archives (e.g., a national library, CLOCKSS, or Portico). We also have to be sure that those archiving services are themselves sustainable and reliable sources, so that the investment and effort that’s made to archive content will be effective in the long-term.”