Data Execs React to OCLC’s Lawsuit Towards Clarivate

Weekly Information Digest

June 21, 2022 — Along with this week’s NewsBreaks article and the month-to-month NewsLink Highlight, Info Right now, Inc. (ITI) provides Weekly Information Digests that characteristic current product information and firm bulletins. Watch for added protection to look within the subsequent print subject of Info Right now. For different up-to-the-minute information, take a look at ITI’s Twitter account: @ITINewsBreaks.

CLICK HERE to view extra Weekly Information Digest gadgets.

Data Execs React to OCLC’s Lawsuit Towards Clarivate

Responses to the OCLC-Clarivate lawsuit filed June 13 boil down to 1 sentiment: This will not essentially be a very good growth for—or have a helpful end result for—libraries. Opinions differ on how problematic OCLC’s cataloging truly is and the way monopolistic Clarivate is. Some folks have urged the event of library-led, open supply cataloging that doesn’t contain both firm.


Jeroen Bosman, scholarly communication specialist and school liaison for the College of Geosciences at Utrecht College Library, tweeted that OCLC is suing Clarivate “over ‘stealing’ its bibliographic metadata information to construct MetaDoor, a potential Worldcat competitor. So libraries & academia count on open metadata from publishers however preserve their very own closed?” He commented, “Would like to see a webinar on methods to marry the purpose of sustaining not-for-profit library providers with the purpose of getting an open ecosystem of metadata of educational output.”

Bosman weighed in by way of e mail on what the responses have been like thus far: “Typically I feel that reactions that both are very defensive (firms will kill libraries) or extraordinarily principled (all knowledge needs to be open to anybody for each objective, at all times) are comprehensible however don’t convey us ahead. What can be useful is a dialogue on what (educational) libraries and particularly OCLC members [would] like to realize and the way sharing bibliographic information is a part of that. And essential on this particular dialogue is for OCLC to argue intimately their stance on the matter, and making that stance straightforward to seek out on their web site.”

Lukas Koster, a guide who has labored with linked open knowledge infrastructures, tweeted, “Clarivate means Ex Libris (which merged with Proquest which was required by Clarivate). It’s not new…. The[y are the] two important opponents in library software program. It’s in regards to the important bibliographic metadata created by libraries, appropriated and monetized by the ‘non-profit’ OCLC.” He added, “[I]t’s about business competitors, each OCLC and Ex Libris/Clarivate promote library software program. The collaborative metadata is appropriated by OCLC, the premise of Worldcat and many others. Ex Libris is making an attempt to get their fair proportion.”

Ginny Metal, Norman and Armena Powell College Librarian on the UCLA Library and an OCLC board member, sees the 2 firms as being on totally different ranges. She tweeted, “Clarivate is an $8.8 Billion for-profit company that dominates ARL & educational library ILS market. Their ‘free/open’ metadata service will take the work of a 50+ year-old the OCLC (~$230M) cooperative. Very nervous that we’re lacking the gamesmanship right here.”

Emily Drabinski, interim chief librarian at The Graduate Middle on the Metropolis College of New York and ALA’s 2023–2024 president, tweeted:

Once I taught reference providers at Pratt I’d have college students learn a number of chapters from a hagiography of H.W. Wilson. … An amazing clarification of why libraries consolidated indexing providers by way of a vendor, [definitely] a rosy image but in addition actual.

That cooperation and collaboration are costly, we will’t operate with out them, it must be any individual’s job or it’s no person’s job. And who ought to do it and the way a lot it ought to value are basic structuring questions of our subject. It’s our job to wrestle over solutions.

That is my contribution to the [discussion]. Together with the truth that the issue is revenue, and being not-for-profit doesn’t make a company exempt from the calls for of revenue. …


George Pike, NewsBreaks’ resident authorized knowledgeable, says in an e mail:        

It’s a fairly intense contract dispute, and a core subject could also be who owns the bibliographic information, the person library or OCLC? If my library owns its information, it could actually add them to whoever it will like. Nonetheless, it seems that OCLC’s place is that when my library’s report for a brand new title is sourced from OCLC by way of World Cat (see paragraphs 45 by way of 50 of the go well with) then the usage of the report is restricted by the OCLC Phrases of Use contracts (paragraphs 84 by way of 91), and inspiring libraries to add their information to MetaDoor interferes with these contracts. 

It brings recollections of comparable fits within the authorized house the place on-line caselaw databases have been accused of sourcing their content material from Westlaw, stripping out the clearly Westlaw proprietary content material, however retaining the non-copyrighted textual content of the court docket opinion. These weren’t framed as copyright infringement lawsuits (this one just isn’t framed as copyright infringement as a result of the information themselves comprise nothing however factual data that’s not coated by copyright), however as violations of the phrases and circumstances. In most of these fits, I recall that Westlaw received, however the ‘David vs. Goliath’ facet on this case is reversed. 

Becky Yoose, founder and library knowledge privateness guide at LDH Consulting Companies, additionally seen the historic echoes of the go well with when she tweeted, “In 2010 Skyriver (III [i.e., Innovative]) sued OCLC for holding a monopoly over the bibliographic knowledge/cataloging providers market. III is now a part of Clarivate, who’s now getting sued by OCLC. About bibliographic information. I get too previous for this.” She commented, “[T]his is all just about a farce as a result of the best way the market is ready as much as exploit cataloging labor.” Yoose elaborated by way of e mail, saying that the go well with “includes two distributors with near a monopoly over their respective areas of the library market. This lawsuit is funded by library cash paid to those distributors and fought over who has the fitting to monetize the labor of catalogers and different library employees. Irrespective of if the go well with is settled out of court docket or if it goes to trial, there isn’t a particular end result that might profit libraries.”


The Gavia Libraria weblog, which doesn’t maintain again, shares in “Stoning Goliath” that OCLC may not have what it must win the go well with: “If OCLC had proof that WorldCat information had ended up in MetaDoor, it will gleefully have exhibited that proof to the court docket. It doesn’t. It’s fishing for the slightest shreds of proof that Clarivate/ExLibris may need wink-wink-nudge-nudge hinted to its MetaDoor beta members that copying over WorldCat information can be acceptable, or that MetaDoor doesn’t make any effort to maintain WorldCat information out. Missing these, OCLC desires to make terribly clear that WorldCat information simply higher not find yourself in MetaDoor.”

The weblog continues, “There’s a David eyeing up the OCLC Goliath: libraries themselves, whom OCLC has extorted and frolicked to dry for years, if not a long time. … It’s a true pity (and embarrassment) that libraries are so unhealthy at collaborating on issues involving expertise; Hathi Belief may be very practically the sector’s solely success in that house. David may have pressured Goliath into open licenses for WorldCat knowledge.”

As for the go well with’s end result, the weblog states, “[I]t is probably going in David’s finest curiosity for Clarivate/ExLibris to win this particular lawsuit. MetaDoor has been designed … to be open sufficient for forkability: CC0 licensing, peer-to-peer report sharing, and so forth. … OCLC already has a de facto monopoly desperately in want of breaking. If MetaDoor can accomplish that, extra energy to MetaDoor.”

The weblog suggests a “higher [option] than both MetaDoor or WorldCat: ditching MARC altogether for a linked-data cataloging infrastructure. Well constructed, this might supplant and in the end destroy current-generation catalog recordstores and make the embrace-extend-extinguish technique far tougher to re-implement. Let OCLC and Clarivate/ExLibris sue one another into extinction over MARC-based belongings inexorably shrinking in worth.”

Ship correspondence in regards to the Weekly Information Digest to NewsBreaks Editor

Brandi Scardilli