Slashdot Mirror


British Library to Archive Electronic Resources

An anonymous reader writes "The British Library is a government-owned library that legally has to hold a copy of every book, pamphlet, map, journal, newspaper and piece of sheet music published in the UK. Today, that law changed and now the Library will be able to collect non-paper resources, such as websites, electronic journals, CD-ROMs and microfilms. Obviously, the library won't be archiving everything in these categories (for a start, the Wayback Machine already does a pretty good job of the websites), but will be keeping resources of national, historical or academic interest. There's more specific information in The British Library's press release. BBC News (which will now be archived by the Library) has an article on the changes."

21 of 76 comments (clear)

  1. funny face off by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 2, Funny

    so.... dmca vs british govt?

    i got 20 bucks on the brits.

    1. Re:funny face off by TomV · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A very similar requirement benefits the Library of Congress in the USA, under the name "Mandatory Deposit" (here are the rules).

  2. Swedish Royal Library too by k98sven · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The Swedish Royal Library, which has also stores everything published in Sweden (since 1640) has been archiving all swedish web pages. (since 1996, I think)

    There was a small flap about this recently, due to new data privacy legislation. They workaround is that the material is not available on the web, but can be accessed at the library.

    Which is of course, a bit silly given things like the wayback machine, which are located in foreign countries where EU privacy directives don't matter.

    1. Re:Swedish Royal Library too by amembleton · · Score: 2, Funny

      From the Swedish Royal Library: http://www.kb.se/ENG/kbstart.htm Opening hours Friday October 31 the library will close at 16 PM. Saturday November 1 the library is closed Now, thats an intresting time.

    2. Re:Swedish Royal Library too by orangesquid · · Score: 2, Funny

      The PM is to distinguish from 16 AM. Otherwise, confusion could result. ;)

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
  3. Storage by rf0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well I have to wonder how all this will be stored and made secure for the next 100 years. Its going to take some large scale hardware, with a fast recall mechanism. Whatever company gets/has the contract must be rubbing their hands with glee

    Rus

    1. Re:Storage by TomV · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Considering the cost of the existing 340km of basement shelving, mostly mobile, in a tightly controlled microenvironment, with fire and flood protection, I certainly wouldn't expect them to skimp on the storage. But I'd expect the competitive tendering process to keep some sort of a lid on the spend.

    2. Re:Storage by bug-eyed+monster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah it'll be interesting to see how the info will be stored. Looks like they're also collecting CD-ROMs and other "non-print publications." I don't think they absolutely need to store it somewhere that'll last for 100 years. They could store it in redundant media and just replicate them over time as the media's lifespans expire.

      As far as fast recall, the articles don't say if the info will be available on the net. If it's just for archival purposes, they don't need to put it anywhere that's quickly accessible. After all it's a government-run library, so nobody will expect to take less than a day or two to retrieve anything.

    3. Re:Storage by rf0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well I worked out where they can put it all on one of those unlimited disk space hosts. An you could probably do it all for $50/mo

      Rus

  4. Censorship? by samjam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So when all the news web-sites have to pull a story because it relates to a trial... will it be pulled from the archive?

    Will it be put back after the trial?

    Or will it be a highly biased archive where anything that ever went to trial is strangely absent apart from the verdict.

    I used to manage the ananova search engine and it was a royal pain to have to yank spidered stories out of the result set, yet the way some websites work (different urls for same story) it would be back in again after a while. Judges don't care for such technical excuses.

    1. Re:Censorship? by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It's "easiest" just not to archive anything whatsoever - regardless of whether the content's legal or not. However, doing so would be against both the spirit and word of the law.

      The law puts an onus on the British Library to archive everything. It also puts an onus on the British Library not to publish material that might prejudice a court proceeding. The only way to obey both laws is to archive everything and provide conditional access.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  5. Voluntary or compulsory? by Ed+Avis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What the articles don't make clear is why legislation was needed. If all that will happen is for the British Library to crawl .uk sites, they could do that already.

    For print publications it is mandatory to send a copy to the BL. Obviously that would never be workable for websites. But does the law now say that the BL has the right to take copies of what you publish whether you like it or not, as already happens for dead-tree publications?

    For example the library might spider even sites with a robots.txt that forbids it, and be protected (in the UK at least) from legal harassment for doing so.

    What new powers does this Act give the library that it didn't have before?

    --
    -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    1. Re:Voluntary or compulsory? by sh4de · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why is this important? Unless you have "sensitive" data on you web page, storing the contents of your index.[html|shtml|php] is no big deal now, is it? If you do have this "sensitive" data on your web page in the first place, don't you wish it to be archived somewhere. The age-old question of privacy appalls me sometimes. Not everything is government control and big brother watching upon us. Lighten up!

  6. Re:possible? by __past__ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The existence of the wayback machine pretty much proves that it can be done, doesn't it? Of course, it is inclomplete, but it doesn't restrict itself to the UK either.

  7. I hope they archive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    goatse.cx so I can look back on my mispent childhood in 40 years time.

  8. Moving into some scary times . . . by Idou · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I really believe there is too little discussion about issues like this. What you are hitting on is the matter of accountability. It is an extremely important tool for our society. Unfortunately, it usually takes a serious disaster (like the Great Depression) before people realize that accountability is essential to our civilization and something gets implemented. And the situation is even worse with relatively new technology.

    People tend to see technology as a separate "thing" that does not require the kind of scrutiny that other issues get. People only get excited when the technology stops working.

    For instance, the majority of users have no problem with using a closed source OS like Windows. There are some really important issues about accountability that get neglected but as long as it works, people don't care. The only time people start to care is when insecure code allows their files to be erased and reality bursts their bubble. But what is the complaint? "MS, you need to get it together!" Unfortunately, the majority of people do not associate "accountability" as the main factor behind insecure code. They blame MS for being lazy (which is absurd, for so many reasons).

    It seems that accountability is always an after-thought. If the system appears to be working, noone complains. However, without accountability, it is very easy for the system to be completely upside-down, yet appear to be working fine on the surface (most accounting scams appear flawlessly normal on the service, even when BILLIONS of dollars are being stolen or misrepresented).

    This is not purely academic, and us /.er's are not immune. Why do we invest so much time into this site without demanding a certain degree of accountability? Is it not possible for our experience with this site to be pretty normal, yet what actually is going on in the background is quite contrary to our very reason for coming here? Without accountability, how will we ever know?

    --
    Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
  9. Re:That's nice but. by TomV · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's nothing in the BL that you can't get within a fortnight by Inter Library Loan from the crappy little library of your choice.

  10. Are you kidding me? by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 3, Informative

    The British Library isn't a public lending library, it's an academic library. It houses one of the most extensive literary collections in the world and it would seem patently obvious to me why it is that you can't just walk in, fill in a form and just take out whatever you like.

    Some of its treasures are so delicate that they can't be touched by human hands - is that the kind of item you think should be easily accessed on a whim?

    Is getting hold of relevant material at your own university's libraries really that difficult? Or is obtaining a letter of approval from your faculty impossible? I have to doubt that the answer to both these questions is a "yes".

    On a parting note, perhaps you should try comparing the British Library to its one true American counterpart, the Library of Congress. The LoC is a fantastic archive, but despite being publicly funded and supposedly open to the public, you can't access it unless you're actually part of the political machine, as Michael Moore once illustrated.

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
  11. hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    i wonder if they'll archive the wayback machine.
    i wonder if the wayback machine will archive them.

  12. More on the legal implications... by Denyer · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ...no, not obvious copyright ones (the web being a publishing medium no different to any other in this respect; content is copyright but is said to have been published publically unless password-protected. I don't think robots.txt would stand up in court if other agents such as browsers have access.)

    A while back it was posited that sites should actually be reponsible for providing snapshots of sites, though. Fortunately, I believe this was shot down; the cost implications would be mind-boggling.

    I'm glad to see proactive steps being taken, however. Current guidelines for selecting content to archive have produced very usable resources in national libraries such as the one in Aberystwyth where I studied. It isn't as if they keep everything, after all...

    --
    Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Gates M'dna wgah'nagl fhtagn.
  13. Re:That's nice but. by matthew.thompson · · Score: 2, Informative

    Often it's faster than that and if necessary the copy can come from the BL - I've received a book before now that was held in the BL before being delivered to my local library for my attention.

    --
    Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.