Brian Quigley
bquigley@library.berkeley.edu

Discussion Lists

By posting Donna Scheeder's message about SLA discussion lists, Jane Holmquist started a fervent discussion on SLA's (possible) new policy. After all the discussion and some clarification from SLA, let me see if I can get the gist right: SLA is considering but has not yet implemented new policies concerning its discussion lists. Under these proposed new policies, members of a division would not have to pay for access to their division's discussion list. The policies for access among other users have yet to be finalized, but may be implemented based on three distinctions: "(1) SLA members who are not formally affiliated with the chapter or division, (2) non-member information professionals, and (3) non-members who are not information professionals but have an interest in the subject matter of a particular division." SLA desires input from its members, but requests that "opinions be stated in a workable, respectful, and solutions-driven fashion." It is also important to note that PAMnet does not reside on the SLA server. Several PAMnetters mentioned that PAMnet could simply remove its SLA affiliation if necessary, although this would certainly not be an ideal solution. If I have interpreted the discussion inaccurately, I hope someone from PAM or SLA will correct me. In the meantime, learn about this issue yourself by checking out the (multiple) threads at:

http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0101&L=pamnet#39
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0101&L=pamnet#62
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0101&L=pamnet#67
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#21
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#24
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#70

as well as Brian Simboli's amusing "listserv unit" post at:

http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=pamnet&D=0

Pat Schroeder vs. Librarians

Bob Michaelson posted information on a Washington Post article on Pat Schroeder and her lobbying efforts on behalf of the Association of American Publishers. It seems Pat and her publisher friends continue to disagree with librarians on issues of copyright and fair use, particularly in regard to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Jane Holmquist posted Donna Scheeder's Letter to the Editor in response to the article - a very well-written and thoughtful rebuttal even if it did not address Bob Michaelson's points on the value of free dissemination in scholarly publishing. Later, Jane Holmquist forwarded Pat Schroeder's (somewhat condescending) response. See the various threads at:

http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#72
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#73
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#51
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#96

INSPEC

Marika Asimakopulos launched a discussion of INSPEC, its various interfaces and its high cost. Bob Michaelson responded with an opinion that "no research institution with physicists or electrical engineers can afford to do without INSPEC" - although Randy Reichardt disputed this statement, arguing that those who can not afford it get by with what they have, i.e., IEEE, Compendex, INSPEC on CD-ROM and Science Abstracts in print. However, there may be some debate as to whether an institution with (admittedly unsatisfactory) CD-ROM access is actually "doing without." In another aspect of the discussion, many PAMnetters mentioned their great satisfaction with IOP's Axiom interface for INSPEC. It certainly seems to be the interface of the moment. To read more about this thread, visit:

http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0101&L=pamnet#30

Article on HEP Electronic Publishing

Rob Atkinson alerted PAMnet to an interesting article in the CERN Courier called "HEP Electronic Publishing Takes Off." It discusses the "editorial, refereeing, and publishing procedures" of JHEP, and, as Bob Michaelson reminds us, it is available on the Web at http://www.cerncourier.com/main/article/41/1/10. Read the original posting at:

http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#12

Earthquake in Seattle

As everyone realizes, a substantial earthquake occurred in the Seattle area on the morning of February 28th. Although high on the Richter scale, the depth of the earthquake helped to limit damage and injuries. Still, extensive damage was reported. Significant damage occurred in the University of Washington Libraries, especially in the Engineering Library (forced to close due to damage). You can find information on the earthquake and the damage it caused in the following posts:

http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#41
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#103
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0103&L=pamnet#99

Goodbye Gordon & Breach

On a much lighter note, Taylor & Francis recently acquired Gordon & Breach (a mildly disliked publisher, to say the least). See the announcement forwarded by Jane Holmquist and Steve Gass at:

http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#34 or
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind0102&L=pamnet#98

Other interesting threads from the past quarter can be found in the PAMnet Discussion Archive at http://listserv.nd.edu/archives/pamnet.html