Comments on DSHR's Blog: Why Preserve E-Journals? Post-Cancellation Access

I updated this topic here.

David –

You are mistaken if you find withi...

2007-06-20T18:17:00.000-07:00

David –

You are mistaken if you find within Portico's response any "marketing spin" or an attempt to create a false impression. Nor has Portico "been forced to confirm" anything. Frankly, I find these conclusions puzzling, and I do not understand why you want to attribute to Portico these negative motivations. I have only attempted to provide an accurate description of the long-term preservation and access role that Portico is able to play.

Certainly Portico does not address – nor have we ever claimed to address - the full spectrum of the community's wide-ranging preservation and access needs for all digital materials. Nor is any single entity ever likely to do so. Publishers and libraries are finding multiple ways to address long-term preservation and access, including Portico. Approximately 85% of the 6,100+ journals in the Portico archive are covered by the post-cancellation rider. In many cases Portico is only one means of addressing this concern. Some libraries and publishers have directly identified and documented mutually satisfactory arrangements; in other cases, publishers and libraries are designating multiple mechanisms to ensure ongoing access. In these early days of managing and preserving access to digital resources clearly the community wisely believes that a "belt and suspenders" approach is in order.

The critical task is to ensure the long-term preservation of and access to important digital scholarly literature. Portico is one – but certainly not the only – mechanism to address this need. The community needs the security that comes from multiple players taking different approaches. Portico's approach, for instance, differs usefully from LOCKSS'. Publishers deliver their original files to Portico, a step which by itself introduces a certain discipline that helps to ensure the integrity of the content and also creates opportunities to directly engage publishers to resolve any data questions. Portico then takes responsibility for actively managing the archived content and ensuring that it will be migrated forward as data formats and technologies evolve. This active preservation ensures that the content will be accessible when trigger events occur. We do not have 100% coverage of journals, nor do we have 100% ability to provide post-cancellation access, but we are constantly increasing our coverage, and we will continue to work cooperatively with libraries and publishers to see to it that Portico successfully delivers on its mission. We have made progress, and we are encouraged by it, but we recognize that preservation is a marathon, and not a sprint.

Eileen Fenton
Executive Director, Portico
eileen.fenton@portico.org

The astute reader will observe two things in the <...

2007-06-17T06:51:00.000-07:00

The astute reader will observe two things in the comment above.

First, although the marketing spin contrives to make it look like Portico are disagreeing with me, they have been forced to confirm the factual basis of my statements about their post-cancellation access product. Despite the appearance the comment tries to create, Portico confirms that the post-cancellation access they offer to institutions is subject to three conditions:

1) The publisher must have signed the rider allowing it. A significant proportion of Portico's publishers have not done so.

2) The institution's Portico subscription must be current. There can be no guarantee that it will be, especially if the institution is so strapped for cash that it has to cancel subscriptions.

3) After each cancellation, the publisher must permit Portico to provide access to the content that institution canceled. While Portico may be right that in most cases this would be a formality, there can be no guarantee that it will be.

In other words, if everything goes right, it will work for some publishers, but your mileage may vary. Given this level of uncertainty, it should be hard for Portico to argue that their product is a comprehensive or robust solution to the problem of post-cancellation access.

Second, the trigger events discussed in the latter part of the comment do not apply to post-cancellation access. The discussion would have been more appropriate in a comment on the relevant post, which is where I will address them.

I would like to offer a few words of correction an...

2007-06-11T22:35:00.000-07:00

I would like to offer a few words of correction and clarification regarding post-cancellation access and the Portico archive (www.portico.org). David correctly observes that publishers who archive materials with Portico are not required to name Portico as a mechanism for achieving post-cancellation access; it is an option. Many publishers have a variety of means to meet this need; some do not. That it is an option to name Portico as a mechanism to meet this need is communicated clearly on the Portico website and in the rider to Portico's participating publisher agreement (www.portico.org/publishers/publisher_license.html). It is also reflected in the Portico's agreements with participating libraries (www.portico.org/libraries/library_license.html). (More on this below). David correctly observes that to date approximately two thirds of Portico's participating publishers have chosen to execute the rider.

The rider to the Portico publisher agreement which David quotes simply outlines the process whereby a library subscriber status can be confirmed with the publisher prior to providing post-cancellation access via the Portico website. This is a logistical arrangement designed to alert the publisher that access is about to be provided to a library and to give an opportunity for any questions about the library's subscriber status to be resolved. The overall intent of the rider – to enable Portico to act in response to post-cancellation access needs – is clear. Those publishers who prefer to address this need in another way generally decline the rider while pressing ahead with third-party archival arrangements with Portico. .

David's posting may have inadvertently created some misimpressions about how access to the Portico archive is structured. The conditions under which participating libraries may access archived content are detailed in section 2 of the library-Portico agreement and are summarized on the Portico website (www.portico.org/libraries/). For convenience, these conditions are summarized here.

Portico provides all libraries supporting the archive with campus-wide access to archived content when specific trigger events occur, and when titles are no longer available from the publisher or other source. Trigger events include:
 A publisher stops operations; or
 A publisher ceases to publish a title; or
 A publisher no longer offers back issues; or
 Upon catastrophic and sustained failure of a publisher's delivery platform.
In addition, select librarians at participating libraries are granted password-controlled access for verification and audit purposes only. This password-controlled access is designed to allow participating libraries sufficient pre-trigger event access to the archive to determine that content is well preserved and that the archive is functioning reliably.

Readers with questions about the Portico archive or how access to it is structured are encouraged to contact Portico directly at support@portico.org. I also welcome any questions or comments sent to me directly at eileen.fenton@portico.org.

Comments on DSHR's Blog: Why Preserve E-Journals? Post-Cancellation Access

I updated this topic here.

David – You are mistaken if you find withi...

The astute reader will observe two things in the <...

I would like to offer a few words of correction an...

David –

You are mistaken if you find withi...