Librarians and staff will do very different work in the future and must be more closely tied to users than ever in the past. With collections increasingly presented in digital form, print versions will be reduced over time, and space hitherto used for storage will make way for social aspects of learning such as information and learning commons, which are in strong demand from users.

On the other hand, the libraries' unique collections, such as the Prange Collection, will be developed, strengthened and more heavily used. They will be a library's unique forte in a world where we can expect ubiquitous access to a basic core of materials through Google and other venues.

With little prospect of budget increase in the foreseeable future, whatever we want to accomplish will depend on partnerships, such as the one with Google, and communication to maintain user feedback.

I would like to depict some of the trends in our higher education environment as recognized by the Society for College and University Planning, which also affect how we libraries operate. There is globalization. There is a new generation of students nurtured in video game culture who prefer problem solving and a more studio-based learning environment to traditional large class lecture. Students are also engaging in research at previously unexpected levels. There is online learning, increasing enrollment by 17% last year, which is vitally important when the physical expansion of library building has plateaued because of the economic situation and fierce competition for resources within the campus. And speaking of competition, libraries need marketing, branding and sharpened messages to succeed.

There is also the annual Horizon Report identifying and describing emerging technologies likely to have a large impact on education. It reiterates the role libraries must play when there is an increasing abundance of work and resources over the Internet. In the 24/7 world of our users we need not only to provide the resources but also the accompanying services.

Other technological developments taken up in the Horizon Report are: Mobile computing. It may collapse into a tablet-type device on which we can concentrate our service development. Open content in the manner of MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) open course content. The cost of textbooks is a prominent issue in the US and improvement of electronic books will greatly strengthen options. I wonder if the libraries will be part of the newly found alternative to traditional print.

In such an environment, we need to focus on the things that we do best and let others do what they handle better than we. It means knowing what is going on, what are the trends and possibilities, what products, resources and services might be appropriate, and it means deciding where to point, purchase or partner.

In my view, Google Books is a strategic answer to many of the elements we have discussed. Its expressed goal is to create a "comprehensive, searchable, virtual card catalog of all books in all languages that helps users discover new books and publishers discover new readers." While the number of books digitized is not well publicized, there probably are at least between 8 and 10 million in Google Books. Their digitization program creates a product which has the following strategic implications:

The libraries never would be able to afford to take on a "mass digitization" project of the scale Google is accomplishing. My own experience at Indiana University testifies to that. Google has the money and the vision to complete this project and to enhance and expand it over time. The project has already shaped the future and our participation assures that we are players shaping the direction and use of a unique product. It opens many research and discovery possibilities for our users. Already called the most powerful research tool in human history, imagine the transformational change when the goal of digitizing 50 million books is accomplished. Participation in the Google Books Project enhances the reputation of the library and the university at the national and international stage.

One of the founders of Google (Sergey Brin) is an alumnus of the University of Maryland and his father is still teaching at Maryland. So we have a natural interest in the project.

Through Google Books our collections are made accessible and preserved. I know that complaints have been lodged about the quality of the scanning. But if you look at it on balance, the few quality issues are negligible. Also, Google has been investing greatly to improve the original scanned product and to correct any deficiencies. Later I will talk to you about the HathiTrust as another mechanism to assure long term access.

A post-settlement Google Books project would expand our collection beyond what we ever would be able to purchase, organize or deliver. Think of small schools and colleges being able to provide access to all the digitized books in the system.

The existence of Google Books will permit us to open collection areas to other uses. As I state above, space is a significant factor in our strategic future. It also pushes an agenda of "last copy," that is the appropriate number of "guaranteed" print copies for digitized titles that libraries need to address.

Increasingly, Google Books will be a force in the open access movement embracing the concept of electronic publication of works made freely available to all users. With Google's goal of capturing all knowledge for users, the expectation of ready access will grow despite cost models. We cannot overestimate the pressures for "more" that will result.

The Google Books Project will engender complementary activities – e.g. libraries can concentrate on digitizing their special collections and formats that Google is not doing at this point. For example, we may digitize the Prange Collection for preservation purposes. The scanned books provide a platform that permits us to create virtual collections and libraries that do not exist in any single place in the physical world. The digitization of medieval manuscripts currently in progress at Johns Hopkins University is a good example.

The bottom line attribute is that no one else stepped up with the vision and resources that Google has put forward. The energy and commitment shown by the mostly young people who work at Google to unleashing knowledge to the world is inspirational. And it would be very fortunate if we could join them.

Now, let me talk now a little about the specifics of the CIC (Committee on Inter-Institutional Cooperation) negotiations with Google and the process. The CIC is a consortium of the major universities in the Midwest – Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue, Wisconsin, Illinois along with its Chicago campus, Ohio State, Pennsylvania State, Northwestern, University of Chicago, and Iowa. It is one of the most successful academic partnerships in the United States, especially the library program.

The CIC contacted Google after the original five Google Libraries (University of Michigan, Stanford, Oxford, New York Public Library, and Harvard University) signed on. Since those libraries were contributing all or most of their large collections, the CIC took a different approach. There are millions of books within the CIC's over 60 million volumes that are unique within the Google project, so that was one focus. The other was to identify collections of distinction, such as the folklore collection at Indiana University, to be digitized as a whole from each participating library.

Indiana was the first of the CIC libraries to send materials to Google. They use a pick list since we are not sending the entire collection. Library staff select materials, adjust catalog records, pack and ship books. Four FTE staff are devoted to this work. Books that are too large or are in poor condition cannot be sent and later will be candidates for local digitizing.

At least two large questions loom as we consider the future of the Google Book Project. One relates to the ways scholars and others can use this collection and the other is how we preserve it.

The response of the CIC to the latter question was to establish a repository, the HathiTrust, to assure the long term preservation of Google content. Many beyond the CIC were interested in this concept. By the time we formed HathiTrust, the University of California system had come in as founding partners. Since then, University of Virginia and recently Columbia have joined. I hope that Maryland will be a partner in the future.

The work of the trust will extend far beyond the Google content initially envisaged. It eventually will include digital collections in many formats and created by a number of individual groups and institutions.

Two weeks ago, we successfully conducted a search against 1.6 billion pages in 4.6 million volumes in the trust. This is just the beginning of the startling shift in research possibilities that digital content married to technology can unleash.

The HathiTrust is an example of partnership at a highly effective level. Similar developments, such as Portico and CLOCKSS (Controlled Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe), to assure long term preservation of electronic journals, are other models in this new world. They reflect partnerships of libraries and publishers – something that we need to expand greatly.

I guess you can see that I have a high expectation for the environment libraries are and will be in. I also hope the working relationship and cooperation between University of Maryland Libraries and National Diet Library will come out stronger in the bold new world.

up

MC: First off, questions other than copyright issues. Anyone?

Questioner 1: My university had been purchasing the microfiched Prange Collection. But I have heard that the sales have stopped and it is no longer available. Could it be that you will digitize it in the near future? My university holds an education-related collection and the Prange Collection includes important materials.

Dean Steele: We had a fixed term contract with ProQuest to entrust the sale. It has expired. The Prange Collection is not the part of Google Book Project, so digitization is not in sight.

Questioner 1: It would be best if you digitize the collection and make it freely accessible.

Dean Steele: It would be, indeed. But not now. We need a lot of change to make it come about. Now, this is exactly the case I referred as the rising expectation of ready access. I feel such demand will become more and more vocal.

MC: Now, on to copyright issues over the Google Book Project.

Dean Steele: Now, let me explain a little about the Project. Google has reached an accord with authors and publishers and settlement is in the hand of the courts. Although Google initially insisted that partial release of copyrighted works is perfectly within the boundary of Fair Use, they decided not to press the case for the sake of users' best interests. The settlement allows users to purchase a product which enables them to access all the materials in Google Books complete with print options. Authors and publishers can opt out of Google Books, but on the other hand, they may profit from long-out-of-print works.

International copyright issues remain, though. Google works on the premise that only US laws are applicable. Additionally, American librarians are worried that the presence of Google Books may push up the price of the books to an exorbitant level.

Google's business model is essentially advertisement-based, meaning that the sale of the product itself is a secondary issue. On the other hand, publishers want to exert as much control over the product as possible. So, it will be interesting to see how this settlement goes forward, how this balance plays out.

Questioner 2: Did the library associations of the US make a statement on this matter to protect users' interests? Was anyone invited to represent libraries at the public hearing?

Dean Steele: The American Library Association published a report and participated in judicial deliberations. All the library associations and academic libraries supported the settlement and urged the judge to introduce some framework of management and monitoring in the field, for issues such as cost.

Questioner 3: You stated that HathiTrust already holds 1.6 billion pages in digital format. Now with such a massive digitization going on, there surely are researchers left out, unable to tap the resources. How do you think librarians will cope with the issue?

Dean Steele: I trust that researchers who will need the kind of research tool that HathiTrust will be will have access. How we help faculty change is an issue. I was told by a professor of history months ago how he loved the card catalogues. It is a matter of belief and practice, and we have to pull the hands of the unwilling. Now I ponder from your questions as to what role we librarians play in the world with massive digital collections and ubiquitous, easy access. I would like to think there is something besides developing and preserving rare collections for generations centuries away.

Questioner 4: Isn't there a risk in unipolar control by Google from the viewpoint of antitrust as well as security of personal information?

Dean Steele: The Library Association has actually expressed concern about privacy. Google has also published several documents on the policies to protect users' privacy and has sped up deletion of data linking a search and an individual. Now, look at the matter this way: there are so many people suspicious of Google and watching its move attentively. Google has a reputation to uphold which benefits us in the long run. As for antitrust, the settlement is not exclusive; anyone can but no one seems willing to take up the mantle.

Questioner 5: You stated that only US laws are applicable to Google Books. But it is accessible from all over the world via the Internet. Don't you have to take other countries' laws in consideration?

Dean Steele: As a matter of fact, it is accessible from the inside the US only and access is rigorously controlled. Even if the University of Maryland subscribed to it, our students on European or Japanese campuses would not be able to access it.

Questioner 5: You mean we cannot use Google's database in the future as well?

Dean Steele: There is a part of the database currently accessible from foreign countries. Google is now planning to forge agreements with various countries to expand access to Google Books. The settlement is close at hand in the US and would serve as a model to consult authors and publishers outside. The purpose of Google is international; unbounded by the borders of the United States and the English language, it seeks to make knowledge available all over the world, in every language.

up