6 thoughts on “Library catalog metadata: Open licensing or public domain?”

  1. Are there any real world applications for bibliographic data? I’ve seen much enthusiasm about these initiatives, but not one mashup service, database or anything useful to me.

  2. Great, detailled post, just two timely pointers:
    OCLC hosted a round table on Linked Data at IFLA 2012, moderated by Richard Wallis (Ex-Talis) from OCLC, and including Neil Wilson from The British Library, Emmanuelle Bermès from Centre Pompidou, Paris, and Martin Malmsten form the Royal Library of Sweden. All four presentations are worth a look:

    Emmanelle Bermès is blogging herself from IFLA 2012, specifically about Linked Open Data.
    She is pointing to the OCLC data attribution guidelines, particularly Special case 5, “URI referencing”. She notes: (my translation) “Considering the simple use of an OCLC URI as sufficient attribution is bringing to the heart of Linked Open Data, in legal terms, what we evangelists have always preached: that Linked Open Data should “follow its nose”, actively navigate through the links; and so make your institution visible and its URI’s valuable.”

  3. This whole having to include attribution for a CATALOG is redonk. This is not the actual book/publication. It’s a CATALOG. I’m not a librarian, so maybe I don’t fully understand the art of the catalog.

    I started to think of how to use Google as a metaphor for this situation. But a google metaphor actually argues in the point of having the catalog being licensed instead of open-source. Google doesn’t make their entire index downloadable. BUT isn’t there a Google API that allows people access to their index? Oh wait. But the Google API is Google’s property. I don’t think their API is developed by open-source. People can make open-source stuff off Google’s API, but the API itself is Google’s.

    If there’s a developer or librarian who knows more about this than me, please correct me if I’m wrong.

    Maybe I should think of it this way. An owner of multiple websites has the opportunity to submit their websites to Google via sitemaps. Libraries have a choice to submit their records to the CC0 Public Domain Dedication. These library records are then available via this public domain. Just as websites submitted to Google are available through Google’s API. But Google’s API isn’t as open as the CC0 Public Domain Dedication, right?

Comments are closed.