Doing what is right, or following Aaron Swartz' example

Please watch this lecture by Lawrence Lessig on Aaron's Laws - Law and Justice in the Digital Age.

It is a really moving address about our obligation to try to do what is right for humanity.
It is about the need to reform dumb law.
It is about how we can honour Aaron's legacy.
It is about Aaron's form of civil disobedience and whether he actually caused any real harm.
It is about celebrating his hacking activity to advance the public good.
It addresses Aaron's pursuit of social justice and his fight against corruption.
It is about the absurdity of our continuous promotion of the knowledge elite who have privileged access to publicly funded research through their membership of "elite institutions".
It is about publishers selling access to research that is funded by governments.
And it is also about those who have not so much access to this knowledge.
It is about Aaron's Guerilla Open Access Manifesto.
It is about whether Aaron's crime was to hoard vast amounts of research material that he downloaded from JSTOR at MIT; or whether he wanted to use it for research purposes; or whether he wanted to liberate it for the Third World; or whether he wanted to liberate it for the whole world.
It is about what real harm can be cause by computer crime in cyber-space.
It is about a government bullying an individual and playing the example justice game in their disproportionate response to his "crimes".
It is about what we should do under unjust laws when the remedy is worse than the evil (apologies to Henry David Thoreau).
It is about recognising the cause of corruption and fixing the system.
And it is about fixing the obliviousness of our daily lives when we work within such systems and laws.

Sketch-notes - Open Linked Data

Roy Tennant, Jon Voss and Ingrid Mason
Keynote for ALIA Information Online 2013

This was one presentation that I felt I should attend, but I was also fearing because it is a serios and technical subject that might be hard to present in an entertaining and lively manner. Well that certainly was not the case with these three presenters. They grabbed our attention after lunch with well selected personal musical introductions for each.Then they managed to pass on some key messages about the benefits of open linked data along with some powerful examples of what data can do when it is shared, open and then linked. A very memorable presentation!

The implications for libraries of recent global trends in open online education (Part 2)

With assistance from my colleagues at UTS Library and the commenters on the first part of this post, here is a listing of the implications for libraries of recent trends in open online education (such as MOOCs). These implications vary depending on whether the University is providing MOOCs or seeking to utilise the content available on them. I have tried below to account for the implications covering both of these situations.

Open Access

If MOOCs (and the like) are seen as another form of scholarly publishing, it makes sense for libraries to push for Open Access as the default standard for MOOC course materials. Protecting and extending Open Access policies and initiatives that facilitate open online education through enhanced access to Open Educational Resources will provide a far better and more accessible future for all than one in which another form of “open access” is available for a fee. (This can already be seen in the publishers using “Gold Open Access” models that are facilitated via Article/Author Processing Charges levied instead of subscription fees.) This issue is covered very well in this recent post by Timothy Vollmer http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/34852

Discoverability 

Discoverability of MOOC courses is mainly the problem of the course provider, but to date this seems not to be a problem if we look at the large numbers enrolling in some courses. Some MOOC directories already exist and some of these include rankings. It should be noted that MOOC resources are often behind registration/password walls. Lecturers seeking advice on MOOCs can always consult Librarians at their institutions for help in collaboration in finding resources for a course as is currently the case.

Accessibility

Equitable access for all users should be the ethical obligation and should be design in at the outset for all MOOC courses. Research shows that retroactively making material accessible is much more difficult, expensive, time consuming and a job that usually falls to libraries.

Advising on IP, Copyright and the use of licensed resources 

This primarily involves access to our existing online resources and the physical collections of the library which are governed by existing access guidelines and policies. It also involves the copyright clearance and management of course materials. It is already believed that fair-use exemptions will not hold for open courses in the US. The terms and conditions applying to many existing MOOCs also indicate that not all MOOCs should be assumed to be “Open”, so their free re-use cannot always be assumed.

Delivery of teaching & learning assistance and support 

If an institution were to offer a MOOC-type course what library involvement and support is envisaged? Our enquiries indicate limited involvement by libraries in other Australian universities providing MOOCs. Librarians should be able to work with academics to develop the courses and advise on the inclusion of appropriate scholarly resources. Librarians may need to engage more with and within these new online environments and learn the skills to create, mash, present and market content in aid of promoting the expertise and knowledge within the institution. Libraries will need to consider how to embed information literacy into “flipped” learning models, but to some extent we are already using this model with our current forms of IL being more hands-on and interactive (less lecture style).

If support is to be offered for remote courses and a massive extension of the hours is involved are collaborative arrangements between participating institutions the answer here (e.g. the Australian and NZ public libraries collaborating in virtual reference services)?

If MOOCs do lead to a major change in the delivery of a lot of higher education, it could mean that libraries need to offer more online services in terms of training, resources and digitisation of collections (where possible) – for remote and online users.

If an institution offers a MOOC course, to what extent (if any) are those enrolled in that course to be considered the same as currently enrolled university students and afforded access to the same library resources that those students pay fees for? I doubt that this will happen to any great extent.

Assistance and advice in the future as the lines between MOOC and LMS providers and publishers blur 

This seems already to be happening and libraries can offer useful advice re vendors and in negotiating with publishers for content and licenses. Publishers may also start to offer new products such as e-texts that are aimed specifically at the mass MOOC market and library staff will most likely be the best to deal with and provide this form of content to support MOOC courses.  Examples so far indicate that publishers see e-texts as revenue-saving at least or a money making opportunity at most so the issue is who pays?  For a free MOOC, they would target individuals directly rather than the university but students of a fee-paying MOOC would expect them gratis.

Collaboration 

If some of the commentators are correct in predicting that MOOCs are likely to be the first disruptive step that changes the provision of education, then the most thoughtful and helpful initiatives are likely to be found in new forms of collaboration. Libraries have a long background in this field, nationally, internationally and across all kinds of other boundaries and we can probably build on some already existing collaborative arrangements.

One major need if higher education moves in this direction is a need for well designed and dedicated online collaboration spaces where people can easily connect with each other beyond a classroom, learning commons or a formal LMS as they exist. Maybe this kind of platform should be built into the MOOC itself?

Technology support issues 

There are some technology support issues that MOOCs raise because of their massive scale. These issues mostly concern those in institutions who provide and maintain the LMS, but the Library may also have a role to play in providing the sophisticated, extended, remote and scalable support and systems that will be required to support our initiatives. Scalability, but also reliability are major requirements. Integration of some of our online services and resources (where allowed and feasible) into MOOC platforms is another technical consideration.

Continuing to promote the relevance, value and impact of the Library and its services 

This is a competitive advantage to the University and also to its enrolled students. Those enrolling in MOOCs without being enrolled in a university will have little or no access to the wide variety of reading, reference and other special collections available from institutional libraries, beyond the course materials provided.

In addition, some libraries (like ours) are busy expanding cultural services and experiences with things like events, exhibitions, performances and art works in the Library. Should these also be offered online? The generation currently attending university is said to value experiences, so perhaps those experiences are another advantage of the campus-based university?

Mobile access

The trend now is for everything going online, but also there is an even greater trend of mobile devices outselling traditional PCs. Not only will MOOCs need to consider this, but libraries in general must do the same.

A more general consideration

Lastly, and more generally than specifically about libraries, a major issue is the amount of time and resources we invest into MOOCs and this depends on the institution's objectives. If the courses do not account for credit, should we be focusing more on our degree/paying/enrolled students. The priority and resourcing to be allocated for the support MOOCs needs to be determined at each institution.

The implications for libraries of recent global trends in open online education

This is really a plea for advice or debate. I'd like to read your ideas, thoughts, suggestions, questions and comments. (There hasn't been much over the last few days, so I'm adding a bit more content now just in case you feel you need more from me up front.) I've also posted this here http://informationonline2013.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/the-implications-for-libraries-of-recent-global-trends-in-open-online-education/ 

As one of the references below notes, there is increased pressure on us all to develop a cohesive strategy to address this major global trend that you really could not have missed unless you've been sitting under a rock near a log all year. We've recently been asked about the main issues, considerations and questions for libraries of the major trend towards the provision of open online education.  I think it is an important issue for all of us to understand more deeply, but it is of particular importance to academic libraries. I'm afraid that I don't have a lot of answers, just some questions and a few thoughts.

I've recently read a number of posts that are starting to do some more analysis over what was earlier in the year a bit of an excited blog fest of news items.

Here are just a few articles that I think have been noteworthy of late:

Clay Shirky addressing Educause 2012 - The Real Revolution is Opennness http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/the-real-revolution-is-openness-clay-shirky-tells-tech-leaders/40894 In his address Clay seemed to be encouraging us to understand that openness is the real key to changing online education. He gives some excellent examples of the benefits, sometimes unexpected, from online sharing. I too think there is a lot in online altruism and collaboration. It isn't and should not just be about marketing.

Everybody wants to MOOC the World http://mfeldstein.com/everybody-wants-to-mooc-the-world/ This post is by Michael Feldstein and he talks about the response by Learning Management System (LMS) providers to the new MOOC platforms. He raises the real issue of long term sustainability (for content providers) and he also questions whether there really has been a great deal of innovation and experimentation in the pedagogy from the "xMOOCs" (Coursera/Udacity/edX). He says that innovation in pedagogy has come from the connectivist MOOCs (or cMOOCs - see http://www.connectivistmoocs.org/what-is-a-connectivist-mooc/). Phil Hill is a colleague of Michael on the e-Literate blog and on 9 November he posted this article that looks at the overlap between the LMS and MOOC markets http://mfeldstein.com/canvas-network-are-the-lms-and-mooc-markets-colliding/  His post illustrates the influence they are already having on each other.

Radical Openness - The End of Education As We Know It http://designmind.frogdesign.com/articles/radical-openness/the-end-of-education-as-we-know-it.html This article is a bit of a review of the major new open online educational offerings, but it really focusses more on the numbers and the Massive side of MOOCs rather than the availability of Open Educational Resources (OER). I think that really is the key: they are Massive, but not really so open. Here is an article from 9 November that explains how Coursera bans reuse of its content (even by non-profits), illustrating why they are not so open http://hapgood.us/2012/11/09/coursera-praises-mooc-wrapping-as-they-attempt-to-ban-it/ Here is a useful guide to finding open content online from Edudemic http://edudemic.com/2012/11/how-to-find-the-best-open-course-materials/ There is also Stephen Downes' Open Online Course Directory http://www.mooc.ca/courses.htm Even more on OER can be read in: Extending the Territory: From Open Educational Resources to Open Educational Practices http://journals.akoaotearoa.ac.nz/index.php/JOFDL/article/viewFile/64/46 and this very detailed OECD report on OER http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/38654317.pdf that outlines the cost, technical, Copyright, licensing and policy challenges that must be faced (thanks Amani!).

Hangingtogether.org - The Flipped Library http://hangingtogether.org/?p=2277 This post deals with MOOCs in light of the flipped classroom concept and quotes Betsy Wilson, Dean of Libraries at the University of Washington as saying that libraries are already "flipped". See also Answers to the Biggest Questions About Flipped Classrooms in Edudemic (which explains some of the above) http://edudemic.com/2012/11/flipped-classrooms/

Nicholas Carr in the MIT Technology Review - The Crisis in Higher Education http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/429376/the-crisis-in-higher-education/ This is yet another review of the MOOC environment as we know it. Nicholas touches on the sophisticated technical challenges for the future and also recognises the challenges in passing on the "soft skills" that no machine can simulate. I also liked this recent article by D'Arcy Norman who questions the hype that says MOOCs are the most important innovation in educational technology over the last two hundred years http://darcynorman.net/2012/11/10/on-moocs-as-the-most-important-education-technology-in-the-last-200-years/ (I agree that things like the PC, the internet, other software and tools might be further up the list.)

Why are we freaking out about all of this? (by Genevieve Bell - I've previously posted here about this short article, but her three rules also apply to this issue because Open Online Education changes our relationship to time, space and each other. ) - http://www.wired.com/opinion/2012/11/st_opinion/

My helpful colleagues at UTS Library have alerted me to these useful resources over the course of the last week or so:

• A useful ARL Issue Brief: Massive Open Online Courses: Legal and Policy Issues for Research Libraries by Brandon Butler http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/issuebrief-mooc-22oct12.pdf  This brief encourages us to start thinking strategically about how we will support the MOOC phenomenon and highlights the following as key issues for us to come to terms with: fair use; protecting and extending open access policies; ensuring accessibility; and the continued relevance of librarians and library collections to teaching.
• What Campus Leaders Need to Know about MOOCs http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB4005.pdf This highlights the following as key issues related to library responsibilities and interests: intellectual property, Copyright, licensing of content, technical challenges, resource discovery and the delivery of teaching assistance and support.

Here are a few of the thoughts swimming around in my head at present (in no particular order & updated in light of some comments offered by a colleague - Stephen Gates):

• Should we just provide directories for various relevant open online courses (like we now provide books, journals and databases)? Or is more judgement needed? Do we need new skills to do this or should we collaborate with academics to do it? Some Directories Like that of Stephen Downes (above) already exist and essentially, the nature of the MOOC beast is to be "discoverable", so keeping directories like this is a bit like that pre-Google approach of Yahoo. I don't think it will work.
• Access to reading and reference materials is all well and good if you are enrolled in a university with access to the required or relevant texts and learning materials, but if not, are Open Access materials the answer and if so do we need to be doing more to encourage and promote them? This probably is the key step for most libraries. Many of us are already active in this space, but we probably could and should do more.
• If courses offered on things like various MOOCs, Coursera, Udacity, etc. are basically just new open platforms for education is the real threat to our individual learning management systems like Blackboard? Will online learning platforms simply become much more open and broader in scope? To some extent this is covered already in some of the links above and we are now seeing reports of providers like Blackboard and Instructure taking the initiative.
• Is there a link to the evolving provision of complex new e-Textbooks being promoted by publishers like Pearson (in various forms - hybrid, digital, enhanced and proprietary). Do we need to understand more about this too? I think we do need to understand more and it is another issue requiring collaboration between libraries, publishers and academics.
• How are publishers getting involved in supporting this global trend? I'm sure they've seen it and will be considering ways to generate revenue. As Stephen points out, this is something librarians already deal with on a daily basis, so we are well positioned to engage with them.
• Similarly, some LMS providers are also looking to get involved. Dealing with LMS providers is a bit of a line ball really, as at UTS, this isn't our responsibility. It could, however, become more complex and require our input if there is a cross-over and we end up dealing with consortiums of content providers, platform providers and publishers.
• What do our academics want us to do? And what do students expect from us - e.g. 24/7 support. Will we be required to enhance the support provided (anytime, anywhere) for online or more remote learners, along with academic staff? Can that be done in isolation or is the answer here not in competing with other providers, but collaborating with them? I think libraries understand the benefits of collaboration and collaborative referencing models have already been proven in public libraries.
• Are libraries and librarians already "flipped"? (See articles above.) If we read what Betsy Wilson says on this above, we probably are already running like more of a flipped model. We have re-engineered our collections, services and learning spaces to reflect this over the last decade or even earlier.
• How can we do more with the data we have to assist us in responding to some of these questions with proper analytics? We are working on that now and looking at collecting open data from all new systems used within the Library. We are also looking at Privacy protections.
• Is increasing gamification in libraries at least part of the answer or do real libraries now offer a unique competitive advantage to enrolled students (in the physical spaces they offer)? The advantage is probably in developing innovative learning and study spaces that meet student and researcher needs. These spaces will probably include more space devoted to non-text media and even gaming, but primarily we still need to meet the demand for spaces that facilitate collaborative group work and meet student demands for silent and individual study.
• If libraries are already "flipped" should we be concentrating on the library as a "space or place" for more inquiry based learning that is supported in person by real people? This probably is the key advantage we can offer over any form of remote learning. We are reviewing the services we offer with a view towards a new service model for academic libraries that capitalises on this advantage in our future library.
• We are already positioned for more interactivity in libraries, but should we be providing even more spaces for this and less to simply store collections? Our current Library is still dominated by books, but with the excavation of our underground Library Retrieval System now complete, we will soon have the majority of our collection stored in it and quickly accessible from it. That will prob=vide us with more space in the current and future Library to meet all of the needs already touched on above as well as a few more.
• Students still come to academic libraries in their droves, but we need to know more about why they do. Is it simply for access to clean, moderated or mediated spaces with wifi, or are they seeking our help services, access to books and journals, a better environment for reading and writing, independent and quiet study spaces that are more conducive to learning than their homes (or informal learning hubs, cafes, etc.)? Are our (managed) collaborative group work spaces really important? Stephen believes that both part-time students and overseas students have a lot in common in what they need and want from the Library in terms of access to dedicated quiet spaces to study, particularly closer to exam times.
• How do we support future learning and research needs (vice simply managing our collections)? This probably means a further extension of our hours of opening, beyond what is offered today and collaborative arrangements with others to provide 24/7 online support. There could be workload implications in this.
• What are the technical issues for libraries (i.e. the real ICT issues) in all of this? Others are better equipped than me to deal with this, but certainly those providing and supporting MOOCs will have to consider the impact of a large increase in load on the ICT systems involved. 
• What does open education actually mean for libraries - should it lead to more competition or are libraries well positioned and do we have a proven history to model the benefits of increased collaboration? Interestingly, my colleague Stephen says that campus based academic libraries are not in competition with online course providers. The free online providers do not give away access to the rich library collections that we provide to our enrolled students. Their's is a very different model to fee-based higher education. Public libraries will not be able to satisfy their needs.
• Are there major costs involved - from the new services that we will need to purchase from publishers and other learning providers and possibly for increased or new licenses that facilitate this trend/initiative? As Stephen thoughtfully points out again, the increasing use of e-texts has driven down costs to some extent, allowing libraries to build broader collections than previously possible.  We are now purchasing new titles or back-titles that were not previously covered or affordable. Other newer "special" collections are being established by campus-based libraries too. These are relevant to the needs of our institution and are unlikely ever to be part of the MOOC model.

Again, I know that I don't seem to have many answers, but I think these issues require a great deal more thought and more minds with varied backgrounds applied to them if we are to build a clearer picture, so please, just let me know what you think.

Peter Murray-Rust's 12 point action plan for libraries

Peter Murray-Rust Keynote at ILI 2009 from Jaap van de Geer on Vimeo.

Peter is seeing no fire in our collective bellies and not enough passion coming from librarians about our own future. He puts forward an interesting action plan calling for librarians to be less passive and far more proactive on issues such as Copyright in academic publishing, open everything (publishing & data), community collaboration and action, and taking more steps to make the library a growing and addictive organism.

In this talk he delivers a pretty good 12 point action plan that most of us working in academic libraries should at least consider very seriously. The whole video is well worth watching, but I know most people won't bother so here again is my summary of the key points along with a few of my own comments thrown in for good measure.

Before introducing his action plan he mentions a few other interesting ideas:

• He grounds his presentation by referring to Ranganathan's Five Laws of Library Science, although he dislikes the term "user" preferring "reader".
• Copyright as we know it must be destroyed for the sake of academic publishing and in order to facilitate the sharing of knowledge (as distinct from the business of making money from restricting the sharing of knowledge). He claims by example that Copyright is currently preventing the sharing of knowledge that could help to save the planet and that we as librarians should be agitating, displaying our "raw anger" and protesting for legislative change.
• He laments the situation in academic publishing where academics create works for free, but are expected to pay in order to see the work of their colleagues. It is a situation that must be changed.

The 12 Point Plan (in no particular order):
1. We should act as citizen librarians towards a common or shared goal. (See some examples below of communities collaborating towards shared goals.)
2. Post all academic output publicly: ignore Copyright. For this, we need to display our passion and one of probably has to volunteer to go to gaol. I like this one, but I can't be the one going to gaol. Sorry. (Beth & Belinda: step forward please. Don't worry, I'll look after the shop.)
3. Text mine everything. Currently this isn't allowed by the publishers who own nearly everything. It stops researchers trying to find stuff. As he says: "when violating a publisher's terms of use, you are guilty until proven innocent".
4. Put 2nd year students in charge of developing educational technology resources. They use it all the time and will know whether to go mobile or to use Xbox or Play Station. There is some truth in this.
5. Actively participate in obtaining science grants. Because scientists find it all too repetitious and cumbersome. They need our help.
6. Actively participate in the scientific publishing process. Again, they need our help. Maybe we can help them to publish their work more openly and also to facilitate better management of their IP.
7. Close the science library and move it all to the departments. He says this is a no-brainer. (We don't have a science library at UTS.)
8. Handover all purchasing to national Rottweiler publishing officers. Apparently they deal with the publishers centrally in Brazil. We could not do it in Australia. Getting any form of agreement with so many egos and so much self-interest in the room would prove far too complicated. Besides, we have less important issues to worry about. It is actually something we should at least try to do, very seriously. It may well be one of the big issues on this list, along with taking action on Copyright and open access publishing where we really could have a very beneficial effect and demonstrate our worth.
9. Set up a new type of university press. The traditional presses have all been failures. We have been handed an opportunity with the Internet, but our presses have been less innovative than other publishers. I think we are taking steps in this direction now and UTSePress is a good example, publishing journals, books and conference proceedings online.
10. We should develop our own metrics system. Publishers manipulate the metrics system in order to get us to buy what they think we want.
11. We should publicly campaign for openness. He gave a few examples like the Open Knowledge Foundation and the Open Rights Group. We should be actively involved.
12. We should make the library an addictive "game". He used the example of building "reputation points" through involvement and participation in something like stackoverflow.com After a while it becomes a bit addictive, like ebay.
We should be asking ourselves "what can we do to change the world and keep the library a growing organism"? His list seems like a decent start, even if it is a tad biased towards science.
He wound up his presentation with a few examples of the contributions made by online communities, including: Galaxy Zoo where 150,000 members world-wide have assisted professional astronomers to classify over one million galaxies; and OpenStreetMap, a free editable map of the world that is up-to-date within minutes thanks to the contributions made by over 250,000 members.
One of the most important pleas he makes is for the democratisation of knowledge. This should be possible on the web. For it to happen, democratisation must win over commoditisation for commercial purposes (i.e. the protection of business empires).
I am surprised that there has not been more debate about his address.

Miscellaneous connections

Miscellaneous Connections

View more presentations from Mal Booth.

I gave this presentation late last week to the ANZ Society of Indexers for their annual conference. It was meant to stimulate some thought about recent developments on the web and also within institutions. Maybe the following guide will help to interpret some of these slides.

SLIDES 2 & 3 (Connection)

I used these slides to draw a connection between myself and Hazel Bell, the other plenary speaker (by video from the UK). She indexed the first publication of T.E. Lawrence's Seven Pillars of Wisdom (1992 text) when it was first published by Jeremy Wilson in 1997. That text is over 80,000 words longer than the 1926 text that most people would be more familiar with and the index was invaluable to me when I curated a museum exhibition on Lawrence in 2006-08.

SLIDE 4 (Collaborators)

I am really grateful to those named on that slide as they raised my awareness and gave me new perspectives on a number of issues. We mostly used Google Docs to share comments and observations.

SLIDES 6-8 ("Indexing" the web)

Here you can see the influence of David Weinberger (Everything is Miscellaneous) and Cory Doctorow regarding the application of non-web protocols, classifications and restrictions to the web. We cannot attempt to index or classify the web in the same way we would for a book or a collection of physical objects. It isn't going to work and it isn't necessary.

SLIDES 9-11 (Connect, share & collaborate!)

Yes, connect and integrate our existing taxonomies and indexes with those available on the web. I'm not suggesting that we throw the baby out with the bath water. Folksonomies work best with taxonomies. We need to realise that what works best in web systems like iTunes, Flickr, LibraryThing and Delicious is their ease of use. You are not forced to spend days laboriously adding metadata to fields that you don't even understand. LibraryThing and iTunes draw or harvest open metadata for us from other sources. We can then add our own tags, and in some cases even comments, links and reviews.

SLIDES 12-15 (The power of sharing)

Social media allows us to share everything quickly and easily. Gary Hayes' Social Media Count brilliantly displays the amazing dynamics of social media as you watch. In 2008 I was able to share images from a world championships being run in Hawaii to the world while the race was still being conducted. Our collection management systems in cultural institutions are not that adept. So maybe we use them in conjunction with image sharing platforms like Flickr or Picasa, or maybe we just chuck out these cottage industry systems and start again, realising the importance and scope of digital media, and going with systems that are intuitive, easy to use and much less cumbersome? Even software is now being shared and users are collaborating with each other to improve it. People are also still busy having their say in blogs and using clever RSS readers to help them to read what they choose to read and not what newspaper editors think they should read or what TV news rooms want to sell them.

SLIDE 16 (Authenticity)

The web is often criticised for being unreliable. But just because something is published in a magazine, a newspaper or in a book does not make it always reliable or authentic. Even peer review is not completely reliable. So we've come up with new ways to measure how much to trust each other and judge authenticity online. eBay and craigslist are great examples of this and they've been so popular that they've effectively robbed newspapers of much of their classifieds revenue.

SLIDES 17-25 (Institutions & sharing)

Cultural institutions are realising that they need to get out there and connect with their users on the web. They cannot wait for people to come to them. The clever institutions are making their web data easily findable and easily used. Mashups are growing. These are just a few examples.

SLIDES 26-27 (UTS Library - now)

Open everything seems to be the way of the future, so with UTSeScholarship we are heading in that direction. We are also using social media to connect with our clients where they might begin their searches and to engage with them.

SLIDES 28-35 (UTS Library of the Future)

These slides present a quick tour of some of the plans we have for our future Library. We are going to put approximately 66% of our physical collection in an underground Automated Storage & Retrieval System adjacent to our new Library building and that will allow us to do much more with our physical spaces in the Library itself. (The rough dates are only indicative.) Some of the elements we are looking at will be stimulated by developments well outside traditional library and academic environments.

Cory Doctorow on Copyright & Open Access

I just watched a great presentation by Cory Doctorow from Access 2009 (Canada's Premier Library Technology Conference). Cory gives a bit of a history of the web to date as a massive copying machine and then criticises various attempts to regulate it. Towards the end there are some really important statements and answers to questions about Copyright and open access publication. These ideas struck a chord with me:

• allowing free trade of electronic editions sells more print editions
• librarians under-appreciate the extent to which they are unimpeachable sources of moral authority on liberal info access
• creative people, such as authors and artists, are not the most astute people on (rights) policy questions (he doesn't agree that we librarians are the moral equivalent of car thieves!)
• authors who give up copyright to publishers lose negotiating power
• authors' relationships with publishers are best described as Stockholm Syndrome
• the difference between purchasing a book and buying the right to read one on Amazon's Kindle
• libraries should spend [part of their] research subscriptions budgets on peer review fees for an open access journal
• citation is a function of access and you get cited more in open access journals
• there is a duty to release publicly funded research to the public

You can watch all 57 mins of his address below. More slides and videos of other presentations are available on the UPEI presentation portal.