Panel 6: What model should be used to address Intellectual Property issues in the digital library for Earth system education.

Resolved: The digital library will include a mixture of content that includes original content created by the library staff, material contributed on a non-exclusive basis, and links to other resources owned by outside publishers and organizations. The goal of the library is to provide access to a rich mixture of interdisciplinary educational materials for the earth systems sciences. We recognize that educational materials are intellectual property and that appropriate arrangements to protect the rights intellectual property owners must be an integral part of the library’s infrastructure and discovery system.

Discussion: In our panel discussions, we attempted to view the digital library through the lens of intellectual property. We sketched out four models, each one building on the preceding one, illustrating the full range of options for how to handle intellectual property issues in the digital library for Earth system education. The models range from no ownership of IP to becoming a publisher with extensive ownership of material created specifically for the library. We identified the following issues as central to any discussion of IP: ownership of copyright; licensing; liability; staffing required to manage the model. We considered costs and potential for revenue for each model and thus the potential for long-term sustainability for the library as a whole.

Model 1 (Geo-Yahoo), consists of a collection of pointers to Internet resources developed by committee and updated regularly. It involves no copyright ownership, no liability, minimal staffing, no revenue stream, and no potential for self-sufficiency. Workshop participants rejected this model, commenting that similar resources already exist and that this model would therefore not add anything new.

Model 2: (Educational GeoRef). In this model the Digital Library develops and provides abstracts, indexing, search engine, and metatags for digital resources and establishes minimum standards for inclusion. It owns rights to abstracts, index, and metatags. This model involves a low level of liability and would require the following staff: abstractors, indexers, creators of metatags, builder of the search engine and administrator to coordinate work of the review board. There exists the potential for revenue from licensing of the information system and abstracts, and thus some potential to contribute to sustainability. Participants agreed that there was value to this model, and made the following comments: The value of the search engine should not be underestimated; this model is a way for educators to easily find what they need; this can be reasonably established within a short time frame with minimal cost, and that it can demonstrate early success and then build more difficult tasks.

Model 3 (Mixed Ownership): In this model, the Digital Library for Earth system education supplements the previous models with acquisition of content from educators, as well as directing users to other content providers. The digital library negotiates non-exclusive rights to original content, involving contracts with contributors. This contract should include a clause stating that copyrighted material has been cleared by the contributor. This model requires staffing from models 1 and 2 in addition to an acquisitions editor and a marketing manager. There exists the potential for revenue from licensing of the original content, and thus an increased potential for self-sufficiency. The participants endorsed this model and offered the following comments: The non-exclusive licensing of content promotes sharing and community ownership.

Model 4 (Digital Library as Publisher and Aggregator): In this model, the Digital Library includes aspects of Models 1, 2, and 3, and in addition it acquires and develops new content. In its role as aggregator it acquires and re-packages existing content for Digital Library users. In this model the library has a significant investment and owns the content that it commissions and creates. The liability is significant, as the library must protect and manage its intellectual property. Staffing is that required by a full-service publisher, and includes an editorial department, business office, production team, and sales and customer service department. The revenue stream is potentially significant, and involves high risk and cut-throat competition. The potential for self-sufficiency is high long-term, but the model requires a significant up-front investment. There was a mixed reaction to this model. The participants recognized the potential for high quality content and partnerships with publishers, while expressing concerns about start-up costs and the time required for sustainability.

Recommendation: Panel 6 recommends that the Digital Library for Earth system education adopt model 3 as a strategy for handling intellectual property issues. This model strikes a balance between the rights of intellectual property owners and the needs of the community to have access to high quality resources on a long-term basis.

The panel was asked to address the legal issues related to a rating system. While there was some interest in instituting a rating system, the panel recognized that there are significant liability issues involved. We believe that the library should contain only high quality content, that the criteria for inclusion should be clearly stated, and that an advisory committee should develop an appropriate system for review of educational materials.

Finally, it should be noted that in order to implement our recommended model for the library, it will be necessary to develop a an authentication system that will allow only authorized users access to the resources of the library. (Users could be authorized through many different channels such as being students or faculty in a university, a state-wide school system, government office, etc.) Once a user accesses the library, it will be possible for the staff who maintain the access system to track usage by school or institution, but not be individual user, thus maintaining the privacy of users. The systems for security, authentication, and data gathering will have to be developed by the technical staff of the library under the direction of the steering committee. Rules concerning acceptable use of the library and user data will need to be addressed in the contracts with institutions that license the content, and should be developed by the experts hired to prepare model contracts.

Action Plan:

The steering committee should allocate funding to hire expert consultants on Intellectual Property issues for the Digital Library in Earth system education. These experts should be responsible for the following tasks:

Develop guidelines for handling all of the various intellectual property issues that will arise in constructing the Digital Library.

As part of the library’s due diligence, develop an area in the Digital Library devoted to Intellectual Property issues including fair use, plagiarism, reusability, and referencing style.

Develop form contracts, licenses, and disclaimers for both content contributors and institutions licensing the library’s content.

Identify existing products and organizations that have already addressed these issues in their ongoing work and consider adopting existing models or contracting out management of this area of the library.