Introduction to Library and Information Science/Information Policy

Introduction to Library and Information Science Textbook home List of chapters LIS books on Wikibooks

Get Involved To do list Contributors list How to contribute to Wikibooks

Previous Chapter	Next Chapter
← Ethics and Values in the Information Professions	Information Organization →

Librarians are far from the only players in today's Information Age. A huge number of people and organizations have a say in how information is created, used, stored, accessed, and disseminated. Each of these parties is influenced by widely divergent goals, world views, and professional ethics.

These divergent viewpoints often come to the fore in debates over Information Policy, defined by Wikipedia as the set of all public laws, regulations and policies that encourage, discourage, or regulate the creation, use, storage, access, and communication and dissemination of information. There are several fundamental issues that comprise information policy. Most prominent are public policy issues concerned with the digital environment, such as intellectual property, economic regulations, freedom of expression, confidentiality or privacy of information, information security, access management, and regulating how the dissemination of public information occurs, among several others.

This chapter will discuss a number of Information Policy debates of particular interest to the LIS community.

Control of information

This editorial states the situation of three specific libraries in Ohio whose hazardous materials emergency plans were removed without notice and without due cause by agents of the Department of Homeland Security. The pretense given by the agents in viewing the plans was that they were there to update it; instead, they took the plans to be stored at a Homeland Security office, where “proper ID may be required” for viewing. Since the areas affected were at risk for terrorist activities in that there was an oil refinery and a tank manufacturing plant in the area, the affected librarians did not necessarily take offense to the removal of these documents given the political climate, but rather the way the information was unceremoniously taken from them.

To remove information that could be vital to some, yet be used as a dangerous tool by others walks a fine line between looking out for the public good and censorship. The Department of Homeland Security manhandled this situation by treating the librarians, and indirectly their patrons, as bothersome pests because of a need to possess information. In the class discussions, the topic of information as a commodity always comes to the issue of who should control information. All parties involved have their own agenda, and in this case the government may have cloaked their desire to remove potentially damaging environmental data under the guise of preventing another terrorist attack.

Copyright

How does copyright apply to libraries?

• Libraries are often the only entities that provide access to the vast majority of copyrighted works before the expiration of the copyright, and to works that lose commercial vitality before the copyright expires (i.e. go out of print but are still legally protected).
• First sale doctrine (1908) enables libraries to lend books and other resource
  • Except software gets dicier, because of End-user license agreements (EULAs)
• Fair use allows for the use of (usually tiny snippets of) copyrighted works for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, scholarship, or research.
• Libraries are permitted to make reproductions of copyrighted works for preservation and replacement purposes.
• Libraries can aid in the transformation and reproduction of copyrighted works for users with disabilities.
• Libraries often play an archival function with print works. Can they do this in the highly copyrighted, license-agreemented world of electronic information? Electronic resources tend to have a very short shelf life, and may not be archived properly for future use.
• Digital Rights Management technologies often don't recognize any limitations to copyright, and just go ahead and restrict access.

Digital Rights Management

In this editorial the authors propose that libraries must be involved in the development of digital rights management policies and the selection and implementation of appropriate technologies, because the interests of libraries are different from the interests of commercial information providers. The core mission of libraries is to offer free access to information rather than on a pay-per-use basis as many commercial entities do. Digital rights management for libraries requires identifying and authenticating rights holders and users, while protecting their privacy and confidentiality. The principles of first sale and fair use must be maintained in the digital environment while preserving authors’ rights, as well. As libraries begin to publish more on the web, their interest in digital rights management will increase.

Libraries already offer many products in a digital form accessible to patrons by remote access after identification and authentication. While the library bears the expense of the product, access is open to anyone who has a valid card. In my opinion, the user identifies this service with the library. I agree that libraries need to be involved in digital rights management so information does not become a commodity that can be accessed only by those who can afford it.

Web content filters

Libraries are one of the primary providers of public Internet access within the United States. American librarians are also ethically bound by the ALA's code of ethics to "resist all efforts to censor library resources." Therefore, when the 2000 Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) required libraries and schools to filter web content as a condition for receiving certain federal funding, many in the library community strongly objected. The ALA challenged the act as unconstitutionally blocking access to constitutionally protected information on the Internet. The ALA also noted that E-rate funding, one of the federal funding programs contingent on web filter use, was created to provide Internet access to all communities, including historically underfunded communities. Mandating filters imposes additional financial burdens on the same schools and libraries that the e-rate program was meant to help. Finally, the ALA stated that web filters are notoriously unreliable, with "no filtering software successfully differentiat[ing] constitutionally protected speech from illegal speech on the Internet." The case made it to the Supreme Court, which in 2003, ruled that CIPA was in fact constitutional.

The debate over filtering in the library community is far from over, however. Writing in 2004, Nancy Kranich notes seven reasons filters do not succeed in protecting patrons from offensive Internet material:

1. Filters underblock sites that are banned by CIPA
2. Filters overblock sites that are legal
3. Filter providers cannot review every site
4. Filters do not distinguish between users of different ages
5. Overriding or disabling filters is time-consuming and costly
6. Some users find ways around filters or find access elsewhere
7. Filters do not block email, chat rooms or videos

Kranich argues that the best ways to protect consumers are through education, Internet access policies, links to approved, quality sites, and reference assistance. Requiring parental consent for minors to use the Internet, public monitoring, and the use of privacy screens also help protect consumers.

Many in the library community also worried that federal laws such as CIPA could lead the way to even more restrictive laws on the state level. Some libraries filter because violating certain state laws could lead to criminal charges. Most libraries depend on community support and money, so resisting the public’s requests puts libraries’ futures at risk. Would libraries choose filtering if there were no threats of legal action and eliminated funding? If so, what does this say about the ALA’s mission?

However, Hampton Auld takes a different view of filtering. In Auld's article, the Chesterfield County (Virginia) Public Library began filtering all public Internet-access computers after complaints that adults and children were viewing pornographic images. The library observed a reduction in the number of times pornography had to be cleared from screens, a reduction in the number of reported complaints, and an improved library environment, despite mistakes made by the filtering software. Auld argues that filters work in blocking pornography while only slightly affecting access to protected speech. According to Auld, the ALA should revise its anti-filtering policy because filters are more effective than any other ALA-recommended method and the policy is undermining and dividing the profession.

The following table represents arguments for and against filtering requirements from an earlier supreme court case, Reno v. ACLU. In this case, the supreme court sided with the ACLU, unanimously striking down a portion of the 1996 Communications Decency Act (CDA).

Argument	Defense
Filters use keywords.	True, but good filters can turn off keyword blocking and rely on site-selected blocking.
Filters block sex education, AIDS info, etc.	Can be set up so only pornographic sites are blocked.
Outsiders select material.	Librarians have vendors preselect books.
The lists of sites that are banned cannot be viewed or changed.	They are all different. Some have viewable lists, main thing is that it is editable and accurate.
Libraries look like "publishers" and can be responsible for its content.	"Good Samaritan" blocking amendment protects libraries if blocking offensive material.
Internet is too big and changes too fast to be 100% accurate.	Libraries have to try to be consistent, not ensure appropriateness.
Let the users decide appropriateness, not the librarian.	Libraries have always had global judgment (ex.- not to carry Huster).
Libraries have limited budgets which is why they don't carry everything.	Wrong- remember appropriateness! (and offensiveness)
Violates the Constitution.	Uses discretion, not removing from one thing, selecting from several.
Selection is addition, censorship is removal.	Restricts the potential access.

References

Introduction to Library and Information Science Textbook home List of chapters LIS books on Wikibooks

Get Involved To do list Contributors list How to contribute to Wikibooks

Previous Chapter	Next Chapter
← Ethics and Values in the Information Professions	Information Organization →