3 ms·
> It seems like you would need some cultural consensus about the function of libraries for them to stage a comeback No, no. Looking for consensus at the moment
by 15457345234 3y ago
> It seems like you would need some cultural consensus about the function of libraries for them to stage a comeback
No, no. Looking for consensus at the moment is pointless, the dividers and wreckers will storm in and elongate the discussion until nothing occurs, which is their objective.
Just recreate the library system of the 80s and 90s without taking any input from anybody. Just do it from the top down.
Buildings full of books and a membership and tracking system. That'll do. No 'events' because someone will get upset about something. No censorship. No giving ground. Just books.
- musicale 3y agoRevitalizing physical collections is certainly a great idea, but it doesn't go far enough as publishing moves into the digital realm. (I'm also not sure "no censorship" is practical but we seem to be moving toward small and very bland collections where anything remotely controversial has been removed.) As Brewster Kahle notes in the article, current copyright law is unfavorable to libraries and makes it difficult (if not impossible) to build digital library collections legally. To preserve existing publishing models, we have also destroyed many of the intrinsic benefits of ebooks, such as unlimited readers and nearly free global distribution. Copyright reform, such as a statutory first-sale doctrine and resale and lending rights for ebooks (and other digital media) might possibly help, though it could also provide a perverse incentive for publishers to adopt even more restrictive approaches, such as a service/subscription-only model. Compulsory licensing (e.g. to public libraries) could perhaps be made a prerequisite for copyright protection. The Library of Congress could also be granted digital lending rights.