We operate that way too. I have encouraged our selectors to keep subscriptions to the most needed items even if they are in an aggregator and we are discarding  bound volumes for only the most trusted sources (JSTOR and ACS having purchased that backfile). Highwire is getting to that point too.

But the larger question is the relationship between Harvard and EBSCO (the former feeling more like one of the predatory publishers, than an educational academic institution...at least titularly).

We have the print. The print has crazy rules unlike any other journal.  We're assuming the 500 are not random and not by year but by how much money Harvard makes by selling the content. This medium sized institution (fewer than 10,000FTE but with a college of Business) spends 10s of thousands of dollars on copyright with Harvard, Inc.

Are libraries and universities the primary purchasers of their content - or is industry? If it is us and we continue to accept this, then shame on us. If it's a broader community than us, and I'm guessing it is, then they can continue to snub their noses at us and we're stuck accepting these rules. And if these are the most highly used and most lucrative articles, then be prepared for the storm from our users. Wouldn't it be nice if our faculty could choose alternative publications. I think we should let them know.

I think I'll work on a blog!

Linda
Linda Hulbert, Associate Director 
        Collection Management and Services
O'Shaughnessy-Frey Library #5004
University of Saint Thomas
2115 Summit Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55105
Phone: (651) 962-5016         Fax: (651) 962-5486        email: lahulbert@stthomas.edu 
Explore the university institutional repository UST Research Online

-----Original Message-----
From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Diane Westerfield
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 10:48 AM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Re: [SERIALST] database access change

I would be very careful with print journal titles where your only online access is in one or more aggregator DBs. I would be loathe to cancel the print subscription and/or withdraw bound volumes. I'm nervous about putting bound volumes into storage if the titles are only covered in an aggregator. You would want to make absolutely sure that nobody is relying on that title anymore before jettisoning the print.

We currently have two big aggregators. It's too easy for publishers to yank stuff out of one otherwise reliable aggregator. The other aggregator is comparatively chaotic and somewhat hard to use, in addition to the vagaries of publisher whims.

Take a look at aggregator title update lists, if they are available -- some publishers are putting us and the aggregator in a bad position by pulling out their content completely, or instituting long embargo periods on new content. Large publishers are buying and transferring journals in a feeding frenzy, so what you had today in an aggregator, may be gone tomorrow or next year.

--

Diane Westerfield, Electronic Resources & Serials Librarian Tutt Library, Colorado College diane.westerfield@coloradocollege.edu
(719) 389-6661
(719) 389-6082 (fax)

-----Original Message-----
From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Lynne Weaver
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 7:34 AM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: [SERIALST] database access change

According to this morning's e-mail from EBSCO,  "As of August 2013, some changes will be made to Harvard Business Review (HBR) article access for Business Source customers.... As you are likely aware, full-text licensing agreements with publishers are subject to change in all databases.... as of August 1, 2013, all databases containing HBR will experience a change for 500 of the articles.  These articles will become read-only, and will be clearly marked as such.

This is curious.  Why 500 and what 500?  Is this certain years of access or what other criterion?  And "read only" apparently means can't download or print.  Why the odd restriction?

This, of course, raises the larger issue of access changing for anything we think we "have."  I know it's the publisher, not the database provider, determining the change.  If we've based our print cancellations on electronic access, though, it becomes a game of chance.

Lynne Weaver
Serials Coordinator
Lipscomb Library
434 947-8396 Phone      434 947-8134 Fax
lweaver@randolphcollege.edu<mailto:lweaver@randolphcollege.edu>
Randolph College
Founded as Randolph-Macon Woman's College in 1891
2500 Rivermont Avenue
Lynchburg, VA 24503

***********************************************
* You are subscribed to the SERIALST listserv (Serials in Libraries discussion forum)
* Have questions or need help? Contact: SERIALST-REQUEST@LIST.UVM.EDU
* For additional information, see  the SERIALST Scope, Purpose and Usage Guidelines <http://www.uvm.edu/~bmaclenn/serialst.html>
***********************************************

***********************************************
* You are subscribed to the SERIALST listserv (Serials in Libraries discussion forum)
* Have questions or need help? Contact: SERIALST-REQUEST@LIST.UVM.EDU
* For additional information, see  the SERIALST Scope, Purpose and Usage Guidelines <http://www.uvm.edu/~bmaclenn/serialst.html>
***********************************************

***********************************************
* You are subscribed to the SERIALST listserv (Serials in Libraries discussion forum)
* Have questions or need help? Contact: SERIALST-REQUEST@LIST.UVM.EDU
* For additional information, see  the SERIALST Scope, Purpose and Usage Guidelines <http://www.uvm.edu/~bmaclenn/serialst.html>
***********************************************