A
cheap price celebrex person's doctor can provide them with more advice on steps
betnovate sale they can take and things they should avoid to help
cialis online stores their shingles scabs heal. A person who experiences severe symptoms
generic petcam (metacam) oral suspension of dysentery should see their doctor for a diagnosis and
buy asacol appropriate treatment. According to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood
find discount accutane Institute, thrombocytopenia is a condition that involves low blood platelet
nexium without rx counts. The recommended label serving size may differ from the
cialis generic size a person should eat for portion control. The Food
advair in bangkok and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved six biologics for the
cheapest metronidazole gel treatment of uncontrolled asthma. If a person has both conditions,
buying robaxin online a healthcare professional may recommend certain treatments over others. However,
colchicine free sample your cost depends on several factors, including your specific insurance
buy lipitor without prescription coverage and treatment plan. Even though myeloma is not typically
discount aldactone curable, people often live for many years after receiving this diagnosis..
Robert Darnton, a historian and head of Harvard’s library system, has an important article in the New York Review of Books, called Google and the Future of Books. It lays the utopian Enlightenment vision of a “Republic of Letters” side by side with the development of the Internet. Darnton explains beautifully how the Enlightenment ideal failed to come about (through professionalization and commercialization of knowledge), and warns that we are about to miss another opportunity because of the settlement hammered out between the publishing industry and Google about copyright issues with the Google Books project. The most poignant passage is the following:
Looking back over the course of digitization from the 1990s, we now can see that we missed a great opportunity. Action by Congress and the Library of Congress or a grand alliance of research libraries supported by a coalition of foundations could have done the job [of digitizing the world’s books and making them available over the Internet] at a feasible cost and designed it in a manner that would have put the public interest first.¬†‚Ķ¬†We could have created a National Digital Library‚Äîthe twenty-first-century equivalent of the Library of Alexandria. It is too late now. Not only have we failed to realize that possibility, but, even worse, we are allowing a question of public policy‚Äîthe control of access to information‚Äîto be determined by private lawsuit.
The article is simple and clear, if a bit tough to read from the 02138 zip code. For Harvard has one of the greatest of university libraries, and though Darnton doesn’t say it, he knows perfectly well that those who came before him at Harvard signed a bad deal with Google, utterly without consultation and public discussion, under unseemly circumstances — as I (as well as others) have
previously blogged. We at Harvard helped squander the Enlightenment dream.
This entry was posted
on Friday, February 6th, 2009 at 6:44 pm and is filed under Open Access, Owning bits—copyright.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
It’s not too late for libraries to take a stronger stance and get involved in the Google book settlement case before we let a commercial entity centralize information!!