6.0145 TLG Policies (1/47)

Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Mon, 20 Jul 1992 17:57:24 EDT

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 6, No. 0145. Monday, 20 Jul 1992.

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 11:11:59 -0700
From: Ted Brunner <tbrunner@orion.oac.uci.edu>
Subject: TLG Policies

My July 14 message re TLG text downloading was meant not to generate
controversy but to remind TLG CD ROM licensees that the license
agreement signed by each of them has something to say on the subject
at issue.

As it turned out, this reminder gave rise to a number of questions on
HUMANIST, among them the following:

"What kinds of legal contracts did TLG enter with copyright holders,
how many copyright holders are involved, what percentage of texts are
under contract, what is the duration of the contracts, and how do they terminate

Ever so gently: (1) the TLG's business affairs are the TLG's business,
(2) subscription to the TLG CD ROM is not mandatory, i.e., (3) anyone
unhappy with the provisions of the TLG license agreement may opt not
to obtain a TLG CD ROM.

Someone else raised the following questions: "These
stipulations do not prohibit one from using the TLG without the
benefit of downloading, does it? In other words, I can conduct a word
search with it, I suppose. . ."

The answers are no and yes. No, these stipulations do not prohibit
one from using the TLG without the benefit of downloading, and yes,
one can conduct a word search with the TLG. But then the TLG license
agreement never did contain a stipulation prohibiting word searches....

The TLG license agreement is not the product of a TLG director's
unilateral whimsy; rather, it is the result of months of deliberations
on the part of a policy-making body containing numerous individuals,
some of them appointed representatives of the American Philological
Association. These individuals tried their best to come up with
sensible policies--sensible both from the point of view of the user
and from the point of view of the TLG. And, no: I am not about to
report on who participated in the discussions, what people talked
about, how many times a week they met, and who did (or did not) have
Diet Pepsi for lunch. What I will add is the following:

The TLG staff works very hard trying to serve the field. Judging from
the communications that reach us every day, 99.9% of the thousands of
TLG users scattered around the world appreciate what we are doing, and
what we have done. To that other .1%: please understand that we are
not trying to harm research and scholarship. The opposite is the case.

Theodore F. Brunner