7 ms·

That's what I've often wondered. Why isn't this a government initiative to take the Library of Congress and provide a digital layer on top of it for public acce

That's what I've often wondered. Why isn't this a government initiative to take the Library of Congress and provide a digital layer on top of it for public access. Then just turn the regular libraries into community centers without the overhead cost of book storage, purchasing, & cataloging. I don't know about anyone else, but the idea of this being in the hands of a single corporation is unnerving.

nanairo 16y ago
I think the EU tried something like that... not sure what's happened to it in the end.
CWuestefeld 16y ago
Why isn't this a government initiative to take the Library of Congress and provide a digital layer... There's nothing in the Constitution that gives the Federal government the authority (let alone the responsibility to do this). the idea of this being in the hands of a single corporation is unnerving. And having it controlled by the government would make you breathe a sigh of relief? The opportunities for curating the collection as in 1984 are scary enough, but consider the accuracy of government data in other areas.
- yequalsx 16y ago
  Do favor abolishing the Library of Congress? It isn't mentioned in the Constitution. Neither is the FAA, NSA, Department of the Air Force, etc.
  - CWuestefeld 16y ago
    The NSA, Air Force, etc. are branches of the armed forces. While not explicitly mentioned by name, they're pretty clearly implied by Article I Section 8. The FAA is a little grayer, and I wouldn't necessarily mind losing it. But I can see it sneaking in under the (much abused) Interstate Commerce Clause, also in Article I Section 8. I can't put my finger on anything authorizing a giant library. Maybe under the "necessary and proper" clause, with a claim that they need a comprehensive library at hand in order to research for the government's other responsibilities (in real life, do they actually use it for that?).
    - MichaelSalib 16y ago
      A modern air force gives the President the ability to push some buttons and annihilate entire American cities. At his sole discretion. With no judicial review. And no legislation needed. I cannot imagine how granting such unlimited power to the President is congruent with any rational reading of the Constitution. Do you really believe that the founders who insisted that the President couldn't be trusted with the ability to declare war would be happy giving the President complete authority to annihilate entire cities at his sole discretion?
    - _delirium 16y ago
      Considering the Library of Congress was established in 1800, and overseen by many of the same people who wrote and ratified the Constitution (Thomas Jefferson personally donated his book collection to it), you must have an understanding of the Constitution quite different from the founders if you think the LOC isn't authorized by it.
    - enjo 16y ago
      You would favor abolishing the FAA? Really?
    - yequalsx 16y ago
      It appeared from your original statement that things not listed in the Constitution were opposed by you. This includes the Department of the Air Force. The Constitution allows for the Department of the Navy and the Department of the Army but nothing about the Department of the Air Force. I would say promoting the general welfare includes making all non-copyrighted materials publicly available. Clearly we differ on this but the assertion that it's unconstitutional is not so clear cut as you make it to be.
- anigbrowl 16y ago
  There's nothing which makes it off-limits either. In fact, Article 1 s.8 specifically grants the power to Congress '[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries,' which is why the Library of congress exists to begin with, and if you want to sue someone for infringing your copyright it helps considerably to have your work already registered in said Library of Congress. Making that information digitally accessible would seem to be a natural extension of that, in much the same way that being able to look up regulations, legislation, court decisions etc. online has vastly simplified and lowered the cost of research. True, there's nothing explicit about the internet in the Constitution. I sometimes wonder how you can bring yourself to use the internet, considering how it's an out-of-control government boondoggle and all.
  - CWuestefeld 16y ago
    which is why the Library of congress exists to begin with Interesting, I was not aware of this. Can you cite evidence? I sometimes wonder how you can bring yourself to use the internet Exaggerate much? In any case, the Internet's underlying technology was developed by the DoD. Today, the infrastructure is private. To be honest, I'm not clear on where bodies like ICANN fall, in the public/private space. Can someone enlighten me?
    - anigbrowl 16y ago
      which is why the Library of congress exists to begin with// Interesting, I was not aware of this. Can you cite evidence? Surely. I'll put Google books links in the same order as the legal citations. Beginning with the copyright act of 1790, 1 Stat 124, those seeking copyright protection were required to deposit a copy of the work in question with the office of the secretary of State. http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22united%20states%22%20%22statutes%20at%20large%22%20%22library%20of%20congress%22%20copyright&pg=PA30#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22unit... At this time, the Library of congress didn't even exist; it was established in 1800 when the US moved the government to it's current location in DC. The post of Librarian was made a paid position in 1802, and in 1815 the purchase of Thomas Jefferson's (much larger) personal library for ~$25,000 was authorized following a fire which destroyed the most of the books in the Congressional library. At this time it was not a public library, but only for use of members of the government - first Congress, then the executive, and later members of the judiciary. Although it kept expanding, it was basically a private reference library. By 1844 many thought the US should have a national library of some sort - something Jefferson himself had urged, arguing that there was no subject on which congress might not at some point wish to research as part of its lawmaking activity. The generous bequest of James Smithson led congress to pass on 8/10/1846 an act to establish the "Smithsonian Institution, for the Increase and Diffusion of Knowledge among Men." Article 10 of this amended the Copyright act of 1831, directing that copies of all copyrighted works should henceforth be deposited with both the Smithsonian and the LoC, 9 Stat 106. http://books.google.com/books?id=TGcZAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22united%20states%22%20%22statutes%20at%20large%22%20%22library%20of%20congress%22%20copyright&pg=PA44#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=TGcZAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22unit... By 1859 neither the Smithsonian nor the LoC had established themselves as clear 'national' libraries, with varying complaints about the completeness of their collections, accuracy of the catalogs and so on. Development of LoC had been set back several years by another fire in 1852, as well as the need to service new, smaller, libraries for the sole use of the House and Senate. The situation had become confusing, so in the meantime Congress passed "An act for keeping and distributing all public documents," 11 Stat 138, which directed that copyright and patent materials still held by the Secretary of State be transferred to the Department of the Interior, apparently on the theory that the DoI was best placed to service requests for copies and catalogs from libraries in the individual states. http://books.google.com/books?id=vio3AAAAIAAJ&dq=1859%20act%20congress%20public%20documents&pg=PA379#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=vio3AAAAIAAJ&dq=1859%20... The Civil war interrupted matters, and Lincoln's first appointee as Librarian spent most of the war out in the field After it had ended, a new librarian took over named Ainsworth Spofford, who was dedicated to the original idea of a national library. His efforts led to the passage of legislation bringing copyright deposits back to the LoC (13 Stat 540 (1865)); the Smithsonian deposit, which moved the whole Smithsonian collection into the LoC and for the first time provided in law that it should be fully accessible to the public except for one month a year during recess, to make repairs (14 Stat 13 (1867)), and amendment to the Copyright making registration with the LoC mandatory on pain of a fine (14 Stat 395 (1867)); and the Copyright Act of 1870, which left the Department of the Interior in sole charge of patents and trademarks, and made the LoC the sole organ for registration and (mandatory) deposit of copyrighted works (16 Stat 198, pp212-216). http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22united%20states%22%20%22statutes%20at%20large%22%20%22library%20of%20congress%22%20copyright&pg=PA42#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22unit... The International Copyright Law of 1891 set up reciprocal recognition of other countries' copyrights, conditional upon deposit of those works in the LoC. All this collecting swelled the volume of works in the library to something approaching half a million, which eventually provided the justification for the purchase of land for and construction of the building which houses the LoC today (after a couple of expensive false starts) in 1896, and in 1897 Congress decided to grant authority to make "rules and regulations for the government of the Library", including administration of copyrights, to the Librarian. http://books.google.com/books?id=uwguAAAAIAAJ&dq=act%20of%20congress%20%22rules%20and%20regulations%20for%20the%20government%22%201897%20library&pg=PA544#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=uwguAAAAIAAJ&dq=act%20o... there's general information (beyond the scope of your question) about the development of the library at http://www.loc.gov/loc/legacy/loc.html http://www.loc.gov/loc/legacy/loc.html. You might be surprised to know that the LoC also has (IMHO) the most comprehensive collection of media filespecs, at http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/ http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/ which is very useful if you're asked to provide a codec for some obscure file format.
MichaelSalib 16y ago
I think the answer is the same as for the question of why is copyright law so badly broken as to create a huge orphan works problem? I mean, there are easy tweaks to the copyright system that would alleviate the orphan works problem without interfering with the minuscule fraction of very old works that are still profitable. The answer in both cases is regulatory capture. The parts of the government that would deal with this have lots of interaction with publishers and authors lobbying them. And those groups hate all the digitization plans. From the perspective of a content producer, technology is the worst thing ever. Every year, technology advances and increases the number of ways that people can spend time not reading the works of any one author. A mass book digitization program would swamp the market with old books which means fewer sales for recently published books. It might allow people to get into hobbies that would sap up their time and prevent them from buying new books! Can you imagine if Wikipedia didn't exist? Think of the billions of person-hours that wouldn't have been spent reading and writing Wikipedia articles...that time would have gone somewhere, and part of it would certainly have been spent reading best seller books purchased at a book store.

nanairo 16y ago

I think the EU tried something like that... not sure what's happened to it in the end.

CWuestefeld 16y ago

Why isn't this a government initiative to take the Library of Congress and provide a digital layer... There's nothing in the Constitution that gives the Federal government the authority (let alone the responsibility to do this). the idea of this being in the hands of a single corporation is unnerving. And having it controlled by the government would make you breathe a sigh of relief? The opportunities for curating the collection as in 1984 are scary enough, but consider the accuracy of government data in other areas.

yequalsx 16y ago
Do favor abolishing the Library of Congress? It isn't mentioned in the Constitution. Neither is the FAA, NSA, Department of the Air Force, etc.
- CWuestefeld 16y ago
  The NSA, Air Force, etc. are branches of the armed forces. While not explicitly mentioned by name, they're pretty clearly implied by Article I Section 8. The FAA is a little grayer, and I wouldn't necessarily mind losing it. But I can see it sneaking in under the (much abused) Interstate Commerce Clause, also in Article I Section 8. I can't put my finger on anything authorizing a giant library. Maybe under the "necessary and proper" clause, with a claim that they need a comprehensive library at hand in order to research for the government's other responsibilities (in real life, do they actually use it for that?).
  - MichaelSalib 16y ago
    A modern air force gives the President the ability to push some buttons and annihilate entire American cities. At his sole discretion. With no judicial review. And no legislation needed. I cannot imagine how granting such unlimited power to the President is congruent with any rational reading of the Constitution. Do you really believe that the founders who insisted that the President couldn't be trusted with the ability to declare war would be happy giving the President complete authority to annihilate entire cities at his sole discretion?
  - _delirium 16y ago
    Considering the Library of Congress was established in 1800, and overseen by many of the same people who wrote and ratified the Constitution (Thomas Jefferson personally donated his book collection to it), you must have an understanding of the Constitution quite different from the founders if you think the LOC isn't authorized by it.
  - enjo 16y ago
    You would favor abolishing the FAA? Really?
  - yequalsx 16y ago
    It appeared from your original statement that things not listed in the Constitution were opposed by you. This includes the Department of the Air Force. The Constitution allows for the Department of the Navy and the Department of the Army but nothing about the Department of the Air Force. I would say promoting the general welfare includes making all non-copyrighted materials publicly available. Clearly we differ on this but the assertion that it's unconstitutional is not so clear cut as you make it to be.
anigbrowl 16y ago
There's nothing which makes it off-limits either. In fact, Article 1 s.8 specifically grants the power to Congress '[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries,' which is why the Library of congress exists to begin with, and if you want to sue someone for infringing your copyright it helps considerably to have your work already registered in said Library of Congress. Making that information digitally accessible would seem to be a natural extension of that, in much the same way that being able to look up regulations, legislation, court decisions etc. online has vastly simplified and lowered the cost of research. True, there's nothing explicit about the internet in the Constitution. I sometimes wonder how you can bring yourself to use the internet, considering how it's an out-of-control government boondoggle and all.
- CWuestefeld 16y ago
  which is why the Library of congress exists to begin with Interesting, I was not aware of this. Can you cite evidence? I sometimes wonder how you can bring yourself to use the internet Exaggerate much? In any case, the Internet's underlying technology was developed by the DoD. Today, the infrastructure is private. To be honest, I'm not clear on where bodies like ICANN fall, in the public/private space. Can someone enlighten me?
  - anigbrowl 16y ago
    which is why the Library of congress exists to begin with// Interesting, I was not aware of this. Can you cite evidence? Surely. I'll put Google books links in the same order as the legal citations. Beginning with the copyright act of 1790, 1 Stat 124, those seeking copyright protection were required to deposit a copy of the work in question with the office of the secretary of State. http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22united%20states%22%20%22statutes%20at%20large%22%20%22library%20of%20congress%22%20copyright&pg=PA30#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22unit... At this time, the Library of congress didn't even exist; it was established in 1800 when the US moved the government to it's current location in DC. The post of Librarian was made a paid position in 1802, and in 1815 the purchase of Thomas Jefferson's (much larger) personal library for ~$25,000 was authorized following a fire which destroyed the most of the books in the Congressional library. At this time it was not a public library, but only for use of members of the government - first Congress, then the executive, and later members of the judiciary. Although it kept expanding, it was basically a private reference library. By 1844 many thought the US should have a national library of some sort - something Jefferson himself had urged, arguing that there was no subject on which congress might not at some point wish to research as part of its lawmaking activity. The generous bequest of James Smithson led congress to pass on 8/10/1846 an act to establish the "Smithsonian Institution, for the Increase and Diffusion of Knowledge among Men." Article 10 of this amended the Copyright act of 1831, directing that copies of all copyrighted works should henceforth be deposited with both the Smithsonian and the LoC, 9 Stat 106. http://books.google.com/books?id=TGcZAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22united%20states%22%20%22statutes%20at%20large%22%20%22library%20of%20congress%22%20copyright&pg=PA44#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=TGcZAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22unit... By 1859 neither the Smithsonian nor the LoC had established themselves as clear 'national' libraries, with varying complaints about the completeness of their collections, accuracy of the catalogs and so on. Development of LoC had been set back several years by another fire in 1852, as well as the need to service new, smaller, libraries for the sole use of the House and Senate. The situation had become confusing, so in the meantime Congress passed "An act for keeping and distributing all public documents," 11 Stat 138, which directed that copyright and patent materials still held by the Secretary of State be transferred to the Department of the Interior, apparently on the theory that the DoI was best placed to service requests for copies and catalogs from libraries in the individual states. http://books.google.com/books?id=vio3AAAAIAAJ&dq=1859%20act%20congress%20public%20documents&pg=PA379#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=vio3AAAAIAAJ&dq=1859%20... The Civil war interrupted matters, and Lincoln's first appointee as Librarian spent most of the war out in the field After it had ended, a new librarian took over named Ainsworth Spofford, who was dedicated to the original idea of a national library. His efforts led to the passage of legislation bringing copyright deposits back to the LoC (13 Stat 540 (1865)); the Smithsonian deposit, which moved the whole Smithsonian collection into the LoC and for the first time provided in law that it should be fully accessible to the public except for one month a year during recess, to make repairs (14 Stat 13 (1867)), and amendment to the Copyright making registration with the LoC mandatory on pain of a fine (14 Stat 395 (1867)); and the Copyright Act of 1870, which left the Department of the Interior in sole charge of patents and trademarks, and made the LoC the sole organ for registration and (mandatory) deposit of copyrighted works (16 Stat 198, pp212-216). http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22united%20states%22%20%22statutes%20at%20large%22%20%22library%20of%20congress%22%20copyright&pg=PA42#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=u90WAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22unit... The International Copyright Law of 1891 set up reciprocal recognition of other countries' copyrights, conditional upon deposit of those works in the LoC. All this collecting swelled the volume of works in the library to something approaching half a million, which eventually provided the justification for the purchase of land for and construction of the building which houses the LoC today (after a couple of expensive false starts) in 1896, and in 1897 Congress decided to grant authority to make "rules and regulations for the government of the Library", including administration of copyrights, to the Librarian. http://books.google.com/books?id=uwguAAAAIAAJ&dq=act%20of%20congress%20%22rules%20and%20regulations%20for%20the%20government%22%201897%20library&pg=PA544#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=uwguAAAAIAAJ&dq=act%20o... there's general information (beyond the scope of your question) about the development of the library at http://www.loc.gov/loc/legacy/loc.html http://www.loc.gov/loc/legacy/loc.html. You might be surprised to know that the LoC also has (IMHO) the most comprehensive collection of media filespecs, at http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/ http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/ which is very useful if you're asked to provide a codec for some obscure file format.

MichaelSalib 16y ago

I think the answer is the same as for the question of why is copyright law so badly broken as to create a huge orphan works problem? I mean, there are easy tweaks to the copyright system that would alleviate the orphan works problem without interfering with the minuscule fraction of very old works that are still profitable. The answer in both cases is regulatory capture. The parts of the government that would deal with this have lots of interaction with publishers and authors lobbying them. And those groups hate all the digitization plans. From the perspective of a content producer, technology is the worst thing ever. Every year, technology advances and increases the number of ways that people can spend time not reading the works of any one author. A mass book digitization program would swamp the market with old books which means fewer sales for recently published books. It might allow people to get into hobbies that would sap up their time and prevent them from buying new books! Can you imagine if Wikipedia didn't exist? Think of the billions of person-hours that wouldn't have been spent reading and writing Wikipedia articles...that time would have gone somewhere, and part of it would certainly have been spent reading best seller books purchased at a book store.