“This is the first in a series of blog posts exploring the evolving Open landscape, library roles and OCLC’s place within it. This post provides a general overview of Open, sign-posting important categories as they relate to libraries and exploring motivations that draw libraries – and other stakeholders – into this ecosystem. Subsequent posts will describe OCLC’s engagement in the Open landscape and examine our distinctive position as a member-driven infrastructure partner.”
“Clarivate Plc…today announced that it has signed a settlement agreement and release with OCLC.
Clarivate continues to deny OCLCs allegations of wrong-doing and maintains that the issue lay between OCLC and its customers, who sought to co-create an efficient community platform for sharing of bibliographic records. Clarivate will not develop a record exchange system of MARC records that include records which OCLC has claimed are subject to its policy and contractual limitations. Clarivate will bear its own fees and costs….”
“Join us for a webinar on November 9 to learn how Internet Archive is now quickly fulfilling Interlibrary Loan (ILL) requests for articles at no charge from libraries that use WorldShare ILL, Tipasa, and ILLiad. Staff at Internet Archive (OCLC symbol: IAILL) supply articles fast—with an average turnaround time of 37 minutes on OCLC’s resource sharing network.”
Libraries who use OCLC records in their catalogues will be aware that Jisc and OCLC entered into a Transitional National Metadata Agreement covering the period August 1st 2021 – July 31st 2022. Following a lengthy national consultation, this Agreement remodeled the charging structure for OCLC services, and enabled all UK HE libraries to access full OCLC records through Jisc Library Hub Cataloguing.
Whilst the Transitional Agreement has been successful in providing a more consistent and sustainable pricing model for future use, and take up has been good, Jisc and OCLC have been unable to agree post-transitional terms for a longer-term agreement.
This means that as of August 1st 2022, libraries will be unable to subscribe to the WorldCat Cataloguing and Metadata subscription using the Jisc Licence Subscriptions Manager platform. Eligible libraries who wish to subscribe (or Authorised libraries re-subscribe) to OCLC cataloguing services will need to talk directly to OCLC.
[…]
“OCLC has filed suit against the company Clarivate which owns Proquest and ExLibris. The suit focuses on a metadata service proposed by Ex Libris called “MetaDoor.” MetaDoor isn’t a bibliographic database à la WorldCat, it is a peer-to-peer service that allows its users to find quality records in the catalog systems of other libraries. (“MetaDoor” is a terrible name for a product, by the way.)
What seems to specifically have OCLC’s dander up is that Ex Libris states that it will allow any and all libraries, not just its Alma customers, to use this service for free. As the service does not yet exist it is unknown how it could affect the library metadata sharing environment. It may succeed, it may fail. If it succeeds, the technology that Ex Libris develops will be a logical next step in bibliographic data sharing, but its effect on OCLC is hard to predict….”
“In 1967, before most even knew what a computer was or how [The Ohio College Library Center organization, which eventually grew to become OCLC] might positively affect our lives, its team based in Dublin, Ohio was making great progress in the electronic management of bibliographic information. In August of 1971, the cooperative helped the Alden Library at Ohio University launch the first online catalog of any library in the world. OCLC continued to be a pioneer in many of the moves to digitize and interconnect library catalog data, all the while improving the services and making libraries more efficient. It also began to generate significant surpluses, with which it continued to expand the services it could provide to the library community and serve a worldwide network. What was once a regional network of libraries has today become a massive institution serving a global community of more than 30,000 libraries, while also becoming one of the leading employers in the state of Ohio….
Earlier this year, Clarivate quietly announced a new product, MetaDoor, which is described as an open platform for sharing cataloging records. Possibly building upon data gathered by a company earlier acquired by Innovative Interfaces (which eventually was folded into Clarivate), this new product is being positioned as an alternative, free structure to share catalog data in the community. In trying to recruit members to use the new service and be early adopters, Clarivate has caught the attention of OCLC, who views this new product as an obvious competitor to its flagship WorldCat service. Challenging both the source of the data in MetaDoor and its efforts to recruit participants in this data-sharing ecosystem — in breach of their agreements with OCLC — last week OCLC filed a lawsuit in Ohio courts against Clarivate and its operating units claiming predatory market behavior and tortious interference in OCLC’s contracts with its member organizations. Clarivate has strenuously objected to the claims….
last year, ICOLC produced an internal report that, among other things, criticized OCLC for the costs and interoperability concerns of the records WorldCat aggregates, including limitations on what libraries and other vendors in this space can do with that data. OCLC responded privately, but based on the FAQ that accompanied the legal filing, one can surmise what its response was.
OCLC’s position is that it is working in the best interests of all libraries and does a tremendous service through its aggregation, enhancements, dissemination, and distribution of bibliographic records. Furthermore, it takes the surpluses that this business generates and invests heavily in other library services, tools, and research projects. Many have argued that OCLC is a positive force for libraries and library technology. Others have been more critical, particularly commercial players in this space….
Clarivate might also argue that less interoperability would be needed in the world of library services if all of the technology was handled by a single provider. But this sole-source provision of all services, while appealing at first glance, would also put the community troublingly at the whims of that one provider….”
“Clarivate is disappointed to report that the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) has filed a lawsuit against Clarivate PLC and subsidiaries, including Ex Libris, and ProQuest in connection with our development plans to create a free and open community peer-to-peer sharing platform for metadata created and owned by libraries.
Together with development partner libraries, Clarivate is developing a community-based platform to allow librarians and information experts at museums, educational establishments, cultural and scholarly organizations and more, to freely and easily collaborate to enrich and share metadata to surface and expose their own bibliographic resources and content to a global audience. It will be open to any organization of all sizes and type. All records shared will be available under an appropriate open licence, to allow records to be copied and used in original or modified form. The initiative supports library commitments to open up access to metadata via sharing and supports library strategy to seek operational efficiencies as it makes workflows simpler, more efficient and more effective….”
As soon as the Loon heard about Clarivate/ExLibris’s “MetaDoor” initiative, she knew OCLC would not be pleased. She placed a good many mental quatloos on a lawsuit, which has now materialized.
The Loon’s read of the lawsuit materials so far is “fishing expedition.” If OCLC had proof that WorldCat records had ended up in MetaDoor, it would gleefully have exhibited that proof to the court. It doesn’t. It’s fishing for the slightest shreds of evidence that Clarivate/ExLibris might have wink-wink-nudge-nudge hinted to its MetaDoor beta participants that copying over WorldCat records would be acceptable, or that MetaDoor does not make any effort to keep WorldCat records out. Lacking those, OCLC wants to make extraordinarily clear that WorldCat records just better not end up in MetaDoor.
[…]
“OCLC, Inc., (“OCLC”), by and through counsel, files this Complaint for a temporary restraining order, injunctive relief, and damages against Clarivate, Plc, Clarivate Analytics (US) LLC, ProQuest LLC, and Ex Libris (USA), Inc., (“Defendants”)
[Clip]
8. In March 2022, OCLC became aware that Defendants are working on a platform called MetaDoor, which Defendants have publicly acknowledged will directly compete with OCLC’s WorldCat®. Instead of devoting the time and other substantial resources that OCLC has invested to create its industry-leading WorldCat®, Defendants have chosen to take shortcuts by using the MetaDoor platform to misappropriate catalog records and metadata created by OCLC, its members, and others.
9. Defendants have been contacting OCLC customers and encouraging them to contribute the bibliographic records from WorldCat®, and provide access to those records from the MetaDoor platform, all of which is in direct breach of those customers’ contractual obligations to OCLC. In addition to tortiously interfering with OCLC’s contractual relationships with its customers, Defendants are also tortiously interfering with OCLC’s prospective business relationships by providing OCLC’s WorldCat® records to MetaDoor users without requiring those users to subscribe to use WorldCat® or otherwise pay OCLC for those records
10. Defendants have also conspired with each other to tortiously interfere with OCLC’s contractual relationships and prospective business relationships.
11. Defendants have publicly stated that they plan to offer MetaDoor to current and future customers for free, which would include access and use of the WorldCat® bibliographic records that are being uploaded, linked to, and/or otherwise transferred into MetaDoor. Defendants’ actions are not purely altruistic, however. Instead, this is just Defendants’ latest attempt to further consolidate their dominant position in the ILS/LSP market. Defendants are engaging in profit-sacrificing behavior to ultimately drive OCLC (and potentially its other competitors) from the ILS/LSP market. And given the importance of WorldCat® to OCLC’s continued operations, Defendants are likely to succeed unless they are stopped from pursuing their current course of wrongful actions.
12. Defendants know that without being able to steal valuable WorldCat® records, MetaDoor will not survive. MetaDoor’s entire structure is built on the back of WorldCat® and the more than five decades worth of work and hundreds of millions of dollars invested by OCLC to create it….”
“This year’s OCLC Global Council area of focus is “Libraries and Open Ecosystems.” Through this lens, we are hosting leadership discussions on topics that are important to libraries, including the New Model Library, open research, and metadata challenges. We are also exploring what it means “to be open”—which, I believe, is the essence of what all modern libraries are striving for….
For leaders looking to be more open, I’d specifically recommend connecting with your staff first. Open data and technical infrastructures are important, but developing interest in the topics you identify will be key to your success. Encourage staff to share new concepts and aspirations. There’s a good chance you’ll identify more opportunities than you have time or budget to address. But you’ll provide room for new, surprising results….”
Jisc and OCLC, a global library organisation, have signed an agreement meaning academic and specialist libraries across the UK will have better access to fit-for-purpose catalogue records and an enhanced ability to share and reuse bibliographic metadata.
We are pleased to announce that Jisc and OCLC have signed an agreement that means academic and specialist libraries across the UK will have better access to fit-for-purpose catalogue records, and an enhanced ability to share and reuse bibliographic metadata.
Building on the aims of Plan M and the recommendations coming out of the ‘Remodelling the Library Data Marketplace‘ consultancy work, this agreement will allow subscribing libraries to access OCLC WorldCat cataloguing services, and will enable all users of the Jisc Library Hub Cataloguing service to download full OCLC records. It also increases the global visibility of subscribing libraries by enabling catalogue data to be shared with WorldCat.
[…]
“Libraries play an important role in their community ecosystem by providing crucial resources and services. As patron needs grow and change, libraries adapt to meet those needs. While much of this work happens at a local level, when libraries work together we can achieve global impact.
Through this year’s focus on “Libraries and Open Ecosystems,” OCLC Global Council, together with OCLC Research, will explore the broader impact of the library in its local ecosystem, in other words, the library’s symbiotic relationship with the social, educational, informational, and environmental infrastructure of the community where it is located.
Through a three-part webinar series, Global Council and OCLC Research will partner to bring together thought leaders from around the world to explore how libraries can and do contribute to open ecosystems. Bringing impactful change to the communities we serve.”
“In October, we were delighted that our partnership with the global library cooperative OCLC came to fruition by making millions of cultural heritage items from Europeana available through the database WorldCat. We speak to Tim Martin, Director of Business Development and Publisher Relations at OCLC, to find out more….”
“The Research Information Management in the United States two-part report series provides a first-of-its-kind documentation of RIM practices at US research universities that presents a thorough examination of RIM practices, goals, stakeholders, and system components.
Research information management (RIM) is a rapidly growing area of investment in US research universities. While RIM practices are mature in Europe and other locales in support of nationalized reporting requirements, RIM practices at US research universities have taken a different—and characteristically decentralized—course. A complex environment characterized by multiple use cases, stakeholders, and systems has resulted.
This report provides a landscape overview of the state of research information management in the United States, makes sense of the complexity, and offers recommendations targeted at University leaders and other institutional decision makers.
We hope that the information presented in this report can support library leaders in talking about RIM systems and practices with institutional stakeholders and to advocate for the role of the library in this work.”