LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ETD-L Archives


ETD-L Archives

ETD-L Archives


ETD-L@LISTSERV.VT.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ETD-L Home

ETD-L Home

ETD-L  April 2005

ETD-L April 2005

Subject:

Re: Two basic questions

From:

Judith Edminster <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Judith Edminster <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 6 Apr 2005 22:55:04 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (98 lines)

Well said, Thomas.  I've been giving the same answers to the same basic
questions for five years. Amazingly, they get asked over and over again.
I've come to the conclusion that it's just a form of resistance--resistance
to innovation diffusion.

Jude

Jude Edminster
Assistant Professor
S & TC Program Director
English Department
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, Ohio  43403
[log in to unmask]

"The past is a foreign country.  They do things differently there."

                                                                       --L.P.
Hartley
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Dowling" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: Two basic questions


> Mike Neuman wrote:
>
>> First, if UMI already constitutes a kind of union catalog of theses and
>> dissertations, why should we spend scarce resources to provide a
>> duplicative collection?
>
> What resources are prohibitively scarce?  Hardwarily, an ETD server can
> be a hand-me-down PC with its OS upgraded to (free) Linux.  You can do
> very well for yourself with free software.  In terms of staff time, if
> ETD management adds substantially to your workflow, I'd say you're
> reinventing too many wheels.
>
>
> You're talking with librarians?  In addition to the points you've
> already made: Ask them how much shelving space they'll need for the next
> 20 years' worth of bound theses and dissertations--or for the last 20
> years' worth, if you want to consider retrospective conversion.  Do they
> have nothing else they'd like to do with that space?  Who pays for
> binding?  Ask them how big a relief it would be to know that no one
> could walk in and rip a few pages out of the only copy on campus in
> order to save time at the photocopier.  Ask them the average number of
> times any print dissertation is looked at, by anyone, in a given year
> (and then show them usage stats from ETD sites).  In other words, how
> much do they pay every year to house, maintain, and secure a paper
> collection, and how much does that come to, per use?
>
>
> Ask them to name any other branch of the scholarly literature that is so
> routinely unavailable to researchers except through paid document
> delivery (the majority of libraries will not send print dissertations
> through inter-library loan).  Ask them whether their researchers like
> downloading electronic journal articles to their desktops; if so, how
> much value is there in providing electronic dissertations to the desktop?
>
>
> Ask them what they tell patrons at the reference desk who rightly point
> out that they have online access to journal articles, conference papers,
> technical reports, patents, and even books in increasing numbers, but
> when they want a dissertation they're given UMI's phone number and told
> to crack out a credit card.
>
>
>>
>> Second, what can be done to prevent downstream piracy and plagiarism of
>> freely available dissertations in PDF format.  Granted that capability
>> for manipulation is limited if the person getting access has only the
>> Adobe plug-in, someone intent on misappropriation will have the full
>> Adobe package to edit and re-purpose at will.  We clarified that placing
>> a spurious version of the document in place of the original would not be
>> possible, but there was still concern about the possibility of
>> misappropriation . . . as is true for any publicly available electronic
>> resource.  Does anyone have a convincing response to this concern?
>>
>
> Focus on the behavior, not the technology.  If I were intent on
> plagiarism and only had access to a bound dissertation, I think having
> to photocopy it, scan it, and run it through OCR would be only a
> medium-sized nuisance - or I'd just buy it from UMI.  It would certainly
> be faster and cheaper than writing the paper myself.
>
> I'm not an expert here, but wouldn't judicious use of the PDF security
> settings handle a lot of this?  If copy/paste operations were password
> protected, would that convince people?  (I've heard rumors that PDF
> security is hackable, but you've at least made it as cumbersome as the
> old photocopy/scan/OCR option.)
>
>
> --
> Thomas Dowling
> Ohio Library and Information Network
> [log in to unmask]
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.VT.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager