Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Library Trustees 2019-08-13 Agenda SAN RAFAEL PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES AGENDA Tuesday, August 13, 2019 6:00 P.M. San Rafael Library, 1100 E Street CALL TO ORDER • Roll Call AGENDA AMENDMENTS MINUTES 1. Approve regular meeting minutes of July 9, 2019 MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC 2. Introductions/Awards/Recognitions/Presentations A. Presentation on Pickleweed Book Club and Author Visits – Lea Ashkenaz 3. Public Comment from the audience regarding items not listed on the agenda. Speakers are encouraged to limit comments to 3 minutes. MATTERS BEFORE THE COMMISSION If necessary to assure completion of the following items, the Chairperson may establish time limits for the presentations by individual speakers. 4. Discussion of Library Electronic Resources BOARD REPORTS AND COMMENTS 5. Other brief reports on any meetings, conferences, and/or seminars attended by the Commission members. STAFF COMMENTS 6. Brief reports on any meetings, conferences, and/or seminars attended by the Commission members. A. Measure D Parcel Tax Committee B. Friends of the San Rafael Public Library C. San Rafael Public Library Foundation D. MARINet Board E. NorthNet Board SAN RAFAEL THE CITY WITH A MISSION Library Board of Trustees Agenda Page 2 of 2 F. City Librarian Update NEXT MEETING: August 13, 2019 FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS ADJOURNMENT Notice Any records relating to an agenda item, received by a majority or more of the Council less than 72 hours before the meeting, shall be available for inspection at the San Rafael Public Library, 1100 E Street, San Rafael, CA 94901, and placed with other agenda-related materials on the table at the Commission meeting prior to the meeting. American Sign Language interpreters and assistive listening devices may be requested by calling (415) 485-3198 (TDD) or (415) 485-3333 (voice) at least 72 hours in advance. Copies of documents are available in accessible formats upon request. Public transportation is available through Golden Gate Transit, Line 20 or 23. Paratransit is available by calli ng Whistlestop Wheels at (415) 454-0964. To allow individuals with environmental illness or multiple chemical sensitivity to attend the meeting/hearing, individuals are requested to refrain from wearing scented products. 1 LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES DRAFT MINUTES _____________________________________________________________________________________________ San Rafael Library – 1100 E Street, San Rafael, CA July 9, 2019 – 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Chair Libresco called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. Roll Call Commissioners Present: Josh Libresco, Jaimi Cortes, Claudia Fromm, Beverly Rose, Robert Ross and Catherine Sumser (arrived at 6:07 P.M.) Commissioners Absent: None Staff Present: Henry Bankhead, Interim Library Director, Susan Andrade -Wax, Community Services Director and Jinder Banwait, Senior Administrative Assistant AGENDA AMENDMENTS None MINUTES 1. Approve regular meeting minutes of June 11, 2019 A motion was made my Trustee Rose, seconded by Trustee Cortes, to approve the minutes of the June 11, 2019 meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. SAN RAFAEL THE CITY WITH A MISSION 2 MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC 2. Introductions/Awards/Recognitions/Presentations Ms. Andrade-Wax provided the Trustees information about the City’s new Board and Commissions Meetings format. She explained that since the Board and Commissions are City Council appointed and as such, fall under the Brown Act and Robert’s Rules of Order. In addition, all Board and Commission packets going forward will be similar in format and layout which should make it easier for the public to comprehend and understand City meeting protocols and procedures. She also mentioned, that when the Board of Trustees is voting on an “action” item on the agenda, a roll call will be conducted, and the Trustees responses will be recorded/documented. Based on a conversation with the City Attorney’s office, it was recommended that staff email the individual Trustees to ask them whether they wanted to include and observe the Pledge of Allegiance as part of their meeting’s proceedings. Ms. Andrade-Wax explained that observing the Pledge of Allegiance is not a requirement but is available as an option. Chair Libresco asked why the Board couldn’t have a discussion, Ms. Andrade-Wax replied that the Board of Trustees couldn’t discuss it tonight because it isn’t on the meeting’s agenda, but staff can place it on the next agenda if the Board agreed. All Board Members agreed. Ms. Andrade-Wax also provided information about “quorum” and mentioned that quorum is dependent on a board, commission or committee size. She explained that if there is no quorum, the meeting cannot be held and as a result is cancelled. For example, the Library Board of Trustees membership is five members, so three members must be present to meet quorum. In addition, the alternate member can vote in the absence of a regular, voting member. Ms. Andrade-Wax explained that a serial meeting can often occur when Board members email or send information to each other, privately discussing Board matters, and that it is a violation of the Brown Act. Ms. Andrade-Wax provided information about public comments during “Meeting Open to The Public”. She mentioned that two items are included in this portion of the meeting agenda; introductions, awards and presentations, and public comment. Introductions and awards are self -explanatory, presentations could be on a topic that is not necessarily under the Board’s purview but of interest to the Board. Some examples may include a presentation from the Marin County Library, Friends of the Library Book Sale Announcement, Recognition of Volunteers, etc. During public comments, the public can comment on items that are not on the meeting’s agenda. Public comments 3 are often limited to two to three minutes and the Board does not discuss nor take any action because of the public’s comments. However, the Chair may ask a clarifying question to be sure that the comments are interpreted and reflected accurately in the minutes. Ms. Andrade-Wax explained the “Matters Before the Commission” section of the meeting. This is where agenda items that includes actionable or informational agenda items appear. If the agenda item requires the Boards review and consideration, then a roll call will be conducted. If the item is just informational, the recommendation is usuall y that the “Board accepts the report and provide feedback”. In addition, while the agenda item is being presented and discussed, the public is also invited to provide their feedback and ask questions. As part of the agenda packet, staff will prepare written reports for all items included in this section and it will be posted as part of the meeting notification process. Meeting packets will be emailed to the Board of Trustees, but members of the public will be able to access the agenda packets on the City’s website. Chair Libresco asked whether an item not requiring a staff report can be added to the agenda, if it is urgent. Ms. Andrade-Wax replied, that most areas that fall under the Board of Trustees purview are not of an urgent nature, however if there was an emergency, then staff would consult with the City Clerk’s office on how best to address it. Trustee Rose said that Mr. Bankhead in the past had emailed Board Members asking for agenda items. Ms. Andrade-Wax replied, as we go through this process, the Board will become agenda driven. Future agendas items will be discussed during prior meeting and if there is consensus, the items will be added to a future meeting agenda. Vice Chair Cortes wanted clarification whether after an agenda has been created, additional items of an urgent nature can be added. Andrade -Wax reiterated that most areas that fall under the Board of Trustees purview are not of an urgent nature, however if there was an emergency, then staff would consult with the City Clerk’s office on how best to address it. Chair Libresco explained that the Board Members do not want to be constrained to what would be on an agenda a month in advance. Ms. Andrade-Wax replied that it is prudent to have consensus from the entire Board at a meeting on whether an item is placed on the agenda and should not be discussed outside of the meeting. Vice Chair Cortes asked whether we can verify this by asking the City Clerk. Ms. Andrade-Wax replied that she would ask the City Attorney. 4 Chair Libresco shared with the group that he, the City Clerk, Mr. Bankhead, Ms. Andrade-Wax, and Vice Chair Cortes met the week before about these changes and discussed their differences. Chair Libresco expressed to Ms. Andrade-Wax and Mr. Bankhead that the Board does not need the proposed requirements and the excessive formality. He added that the Board is very entrepreneurial/progressive and wants to follow the law but does not want excessive bureaucracy. Vice Chair Cortes was concerned whether the Board would continue receiving Mr. Bankhead’s Library Reports about staff and other important information. Ms. Andrade-Wax reassured Vice Chair Cortes and the Board that she and Mr. Bankhead would ensure the Board receives as much pertinent information as possible. However, explained that some information in the past may not have been appropriate to share, specifically personnel and operational matters. Vice Chair Cortes asked whether the Board will still receive budget reports. Ms. Andrade-Wax replied that the Board will still receive budget reports as in the past. Trustee Ross asked whether the Board Members can meet in a closed or executive session. Ms. Andrade-Wax replied that only certain boards such as the City Council can conduct a closed session to discuss confidential issue such as a personnel or litigation matter. Ms. Andrade-Wax expressed that the changes that have been shared are a lot to consume and that she understands the Board’s frustration. She also apologized for not having all the answers and assured the Board that she would get clarity from the appropriate City officials. Ms. Andrade-Wax stated that the Boards Reports and Comments section of the agenda is when Board Members can report or provide comments about meetings they have attended. Examples include any updates they may have received, correspondence, committee reports, schedule of upcoming events/activities, etc. Lastly, Ms. Andrade-Wax explained that if there are no upcoming items on the agenda, staff would recommend canceling the meeting. The cancellation would be posted and announced as soon as possible so that the public may also be informed. Chair Libresco said there were always “standing items” on the agenda in the past. Ms. Andrade-Wax stated that some of those items could be incorporated under Board or Staff comments, but that all “actionable” items must be included in the regular part of the agenda and accompanied by a staff report. Chair Libresco replied that if required, he can prepare a staff report with a paragraph or two in about five minutes. Chair Libresco said he has great respect for Ms. Andrade-Wax for her efforts in changing the format of the Board meetings but expressed that the Board Members are all volunteers and do not serve City officials but serve the public. He explained that the Board wants to follow the law, help the public, but do not want to be told what to do. 5 Vice Chair Cortes added that she agrees with Chair Libresco, that she and the Board Members enjoy what they do, appreciate the staff, like to hea r what is happening at the Library, but want flexibility. Ms. Andrade-Wax assured Board Members that though the changes are legally required, she and the staff would try to be as flexible as possible. 3. Public Comment from the audience regarding items not listed on the agenda None MATTERS BEFORE THE COMMISSION Chair Libresco asked Board Members if they would like to move the San Rafael Public Library Facilities Planning Study Subcommittee Report up so that members of the public that are present do not have to wait. Chair Libresco asked to move, Trustee Rose seconded, all Board Members were in favor. BOARD REPORTS AND COMMENTS Chair Libresco attended a recent subcommittee meeting and provided a report. He explained that there are two reports, one from Noll & Tam about possible locations and another about the results from the recent New Library Survey. Over 1,050 surveys were completed, mostly online. The results will be shared once City Council has seen the final reports. Vice Chair Cortes asked when the reports will go to City Council. Ms. Andrade-Wax shared that the draft reports are being finalized and stated that the item may go to City Council in August, but most likely in September. Chair Libresco asked how the public can find out when the dates are set. Ms. Andrade-Wax replied, the City Council’s website. Vice Chair Cortes asked whether a study session is informational only. Ms. Andrade-Wax explained that the study sessions are informational only and that it allows for the City Council to discuss the topic and get public input without taking action on the same night. Mr. Bankhead said he would email the respective meeting dates to all those who attended the Library Facilities planning meetings. Trustee Rose asked about staff morale regarding the merger, the Digital Services and Open Government Survey, and staff safety in case of an emergency. Mr. Bankhead shared that staff recently attended an active shooter training. There is also a Citywide effort through the City’s Emergency Planning Manager’s office on preparing for power outages. Mr. Bankhead also said that during fire season, face masks are available for staff and the building is sealed off near entrances to prevent 6 smoke/ash from entering. Earthquake supplies are stored in the building as well. Mr. Bankhead added that all City workers are mandatory emergency workers and are required to assist during a natural disaster. Chair Libresco asked to invite a representative from the Department of Digital Services and Open Government. Mr. Bankhead explained that the City’s IT Department is now known as Digital Services and Open Government. They will continue to provide digital services for staff, but now will also include community outreach and information delivery as part of their purview. They are also analyzing how the City’s website serves the public and are constantly making improvements. Chair Libresco said he would like to learn more about the digital services that are provided by the library and asked if this item can be added to the agenda in the future. Ms. Andrade-Wax shared that the merger of the Library and Community Services Departments is official as of July 1, 2019. She explained that the organizational chart has not been finalized. Ms. Andrade-Wax shared information about staff’s involvement throughout the merger process. There were meetings where staff from both departments participated and shared ideas and concerns. Surveys were also made available to staff. Mr. Bankhead explained that Management Partners Consultants conducted the survey and the results were shared with staff. Trustee Ross asked when the last time the Library’s website was updated. He shared a concern from others that it was not user-friendly, especially on a mobile device. Mr. Bankhead replied that the website is managed by a 3rd party vendor who is an expert. He continued to explain that the website is very user-friendly as it has features such as live chat and is fully functional on a mobile device. Mr. Bankhead added that the City has emulated the library’s website, which uses WordPress, to redesign the City’s website. Trustee Rose asked whether the Library is involved in any way with the Mill Valley Film Festival. Ms. Andrade-Wax replied that the Community Services Department currently assists in facilitating the event. Mr. Bankhead added that the Library’s Kanopy Streaming Service is a great example of how the Library is promoting and is involved in the independent film scene. Kanopy is available online anytime to all Library patrons. Andrade-Wax also added that the City is involved in marketing the Mill Valley Film Festival. She also said that as the departments are integrated, there will be a higher emphasize on arts and culture. Vice Chair Cortes left at 7:31 P.M. STAFF COMMENTS 7 Mr. Bankhead reported on a letter that he received from San Rafael Heritage. The letter was signed by Cynthia Landecker. The letter expresses concerns about the preservation and future of the Carnegie Building. There is an interest to be inclu ded in the decision-making process of the use of the building if it doesn’t become the new library location. Trustee Ross appreciated the letter and recognized the organization’s advocacy. Chair Libresco added that others have shown great interest in also preserving the tree on the lawn. Mr. Bankhead invited the Board Members to the upcoming Volunteer Appreciation Party on July 15 from 10:00 A.M.-12:00 P.M. Mr. Andrade-Wax shared information about the Movie in the Park Program where the community is invited to enjoy movies for free under the stars at local parks. She also shared information about 2nd Friday Art Walk where the community can enjoy galleries, open studios, art exhibits, live music, and refreshments while strolling in Downtown San Rafael. Libresco asked about the library newsletter. Ms. Andrade-Wax explained that as the departments integrate, marketing programs and services will become more collaborative, efficient, and effective. Trustee Sumser left at 7:36 P.M. MATTERS BEFORE THE COMMISSION 4. Discussion of Library Daily Fines Ms. Andrade-Wax provided a short summary about Library Fines. She explained that the County and the City Libraries have been moving toward eliminating fines. The City is in the process of updating their Master Fee Schedule. This would be a great opportunity to update the Library’s fines policy. Mr. Bankhead added that replacement charges would not be eliminated and there would continue to be consequences for not returning library material. We want to be consistent with what the County is doing since they are fifty percent of our consortium. Chair Libresco said we should add library fines to the next agenda. Trustee Ross suggested incentivizing people, where people are rewarded for positive behavior. Bankhead agreed and shared some ideas. NEXT MEETING: AUGUST 13, 2019 8 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned 7:46 P.M. LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES AGENDA REPORT August 13, 2019 Item 4 TITLE: DISCUSSION OF LIBRARY ELECTRONIC RESOURCES SUMMARY: The use of electronic resources marks a shift from traditional library database resources, such as EBSCO and Gale which offer an index of full-text articles and citations, to interactive tools for learning and entertainment which include but are not limited to; Lynda.com, Mango Languages, Brainfuse online tutoring, Hoopla eBooks and movies, Kanopy movies, Discover and Go Movie Passes and RBDigital online magazines. The attraction of these resources is that they offer experience rather experiences rather than just information in traditional f ormats (PDF and HTML). The trade off, with some exceptions, is generally that these types of resources can be more expensive. Due to recent changes in privacy policies, user agreements and/or costs, the two (2) electronic resources that will be discussed in this report are Lynda.com and Kanopy. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Trustees accept the report and provide feedback Page 2 of 5 BACKGROUND The use of electronic resources marks a shift from traditional library database resources, such as EBSCO and Gale which offer an index of full-text articles and citations, to interactive tools for learning and entertainment which include but are not limited to; Lynda.com, Mango Languages, Brainfuse online tutoring, Hoopla eBooks and movies, Kanopy movies, Discover and Go Movie Passes and RBDigital online magazines. The attraction of these resources is that they offer experience rather experiences rather than just information in traditional f ormats (PDF and HTML). The trade off, with some exceptions, is generally that these types of resources can be more expensive. Due to recent changes in privacy policies, user agreements and/or costs, the two (2) electronic resources that will be discussed in this report are Lynda.com and Kanopy. Lynda.com Lynda.com is a learning resources that the San Rafael Library has offered for the past several years. This is a rich and interactive online resource, where patrons create an account and engage in self -paced learning through a suite of learning modules. The cost of providing Lynda.com to our patrons is $13,125 annually. In FY 2018/2019, the amount of total views was 4,949 which results in a cost of $2.65 per view. Recently, Lynda.com, was purchased by Linkedin (a Microsoft Company) and is in the process of rebranding it as LinkedIn Learning. In order to access Lynda.com, patrons use their library card and a Personal Identification Number (PIN) and no other personal information is required. Under the newly rebranded LinkedIn Learning, patrons would be required to create a personal profile and agree to LinkedIn’s user agreement and privacy policy before being able to use LinkedIn Learning. By agreeing to the user agreement and privacy policy, the user surrenders to LinkedIn the power to share the information contained in a user profile with whoever LinkedIn desires. However, the new privacy policy conflicts directly with the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights which states; “All people, regardless of origin, age, background, or views, possess a right to privacy and confidentiality in their library use. Libraries should advocate for, educate about, and protect people’s privacy, safeguarding all library use data, including personally identifiable information.” As a result, the California State Library recommends that public libraries no longer provide LinkedIn Learning until the company changes its new use policy so that it protects the privacy of library users. Not only does LinkedIn Learning refuse to acknowledge the fundamental right to privacy that is central to the guarantee libraries make to their customers, but it seeks to use personal information provided by library patrons in various ways, including sharing it with third parties. Page 3 of 5 Kanopy In 2018, the Library partnered with the Marin County Free Library (MCFL) to provide patrons with free access to another electronic resource called Kanopy. Kanopy is a high-quality streaming service that features movies and documentaries. This service model for Kanopy is that the libraries provide funding upfront that is then d iminished on a pay per use model ($2 per film). The overall cost of this service is approximately $30,000 annually which is funded jointly by the Marin County Free Library contributing approximately $20,000 and the San Rafael Public Library (SRPL) contributing approximately $10,000 Users are allowed free access of 10 views of individual movies per month. The combined usage of the San Rafael Public Library and Marin County Free Library is 26,613 views per year at a cost of $1.13 per view. This is somewhat lower that the $2.00 per play figure due to some free content within Kanopy, as well as the introduction of Kanopy kids that allows kids content, once checked out, to be accessed with unlimited plays for 30 days. In 2018, the service was very well received by the San Rafael Public Library patrons with the cost averaging $800 per month. However, usage has increased in the second year and costs have the potential to become prohibitive and unsustainable. To address this concern, SRPL and MCFL have attempted to convince Kanopy to limit the number of movies that users can checkout from 10 to 5 per month which would also reduce costs. Unfortunately, Kanopy has denied our request. As other several large library systems have eliminated the service due to the company’s unwillingness to identify a solution that will work for all parties and is financially sustainable, San Rafael is faced with the same decision. DISCUSSION Lynda.com (LinkedIn Learning) For LinkedIn, there is a clear advantage to bringing users into their platform. From a business perspective, as a social media career platform, they benefit from users relinquishing privacy for access to connections to other users. In addition, This conflicts with library practices which hold sacred the ability for users to access content anonymously. This is because the public library serves as a place where the populace can be freely access information. This free access is the foundation of our democracy as people can freely get and use information to inform their choices, personally and politically. When the anonymity that allows this free access is breached, democracy suffers. Patrons are compromised by having to make the choice of sharing their personal information for access to learning tools. Page 4 of 5 As mentioned previously, the California State Library recommends that public libraries no longer provide LinkedIn Learning until the company changes its new use policy so that it protects the privacy of library users. Not only does LinkedIn Learning refuse to acknowledge the fundamental right to privacy that is central to the guarantee libraries make to their customers, but it seeks to use personal information provided by library patrons in various ways, including sharing it with third parties. (Attachments 1-3) Other Options San Rafael Library and the MARINet Digital Resources Working Group having been looking into other online learning products. A list of potential replacement products has been provided and can be viewed at https://chooseprivacyeveryday.org/online-learning- platforms/ . These alternatives include: Gale Courses from Gale-Cengage, Knowledge City, Skillsoft, Universal Class distributed by RBdigital, Accel5 from EBSCO, and Treehouse. In addition, there is much online learning that can be accessed free on YouTube and from sources such as Khan Academy. Kanopy When Kanopy was dropped by New York Public Library (NYPL), Kanopy emailed all the users to notify them that the NYPL had stopped the service and encouraged them to complain to the library. This misuse of customer information is a further reason to cease business with this vendor. In addition, Kanopy regularly sends users electronic mail (email) to encourage them to access additional content, thus incurring additional costs for the library. (Attachment 4) As pointed out in the article in Variety, the Kanopy pay-per-use model is inherently unsustainable. Increased popularity of the service rapidly creates an untenable situation where the library can not keep up with demand. This fact combined with the aggressive messaging by Kanopy to encourage all the users who sign up to use the maximum allowable plays make it difficult for the public library to budget and control costs. (Attachment 5) FISCAL IMPACT Eliminating both electronic resource providers would produce a savings of approximately $16,406 in the current fiscal year (FY 2019/2020). On-going savings would be approximately $23,000 annually. ALTERNATIVE ACTION Any other action as determined by the Board of Trustees Page 5 of 5 Submitted by: Henry Bankhead Interim Library Director Attachments: 1. Criticism of LinkedIn Learning’s Policies Grows _ Library Journal 2. ALA urges LinkedIn Learning to reconsider changes to terms of service that impair library users’ privacy rights _ News and Press Center 3. Libraries guarantee patrons’ privacy. That’s why LinkedIn’s policy is so troubling 4. Unkind Rewind (Kanopy) 5. New York City Public Libraries Drop Kanopy Free Movie-Streaming Service 8/7/2019 Criticism of Linkedln Learning 's Policies Grow s I Library Journal Attachment 1 Criticism of Linkedln Learning's Policies Grows by Matt Enis Jul 25, 2019 I Filed in News Linkedln Learning, which acquired Lynda.com in 2015, recently announced that all users of the platform's online training programs will be required to create or log into a Linkedln account to access the content. The new terms of service would also apply to LyndaLibrary users who access the platform through library subscriptions. Previously, subscribing libraries could offer patrons access to LyndaLibrary's training videos on topics ranging from video production to project management using only a library card. Requiring library users to create a Linkedln account would provide the Microsoft subsidiary with a patron's email address, first and last name, lynda .com and any personal work and education information or professional contacts that the user chooses to input into the career networking platform . In addition, unless subscribing libraries create alternate credentialing systems, logging in would still require a patron's library card number, linking it to a significant amount of personal information in a database controlled by a third party. Samantha Lee, Intellectual Freedom Committee Chair of the Connecticut Library Association and Head of Reference Services for the Enfield Public Library, first reported on the potential privacy implications in a detailed June 4 guest P-OSt on the American Library Association's (ALA) Intellectual Freedom Blog. Lee wrote that: "the ... patrons who are turning to LyndaLibrary to improve their technology skills ... may not know to protect their [personally identifiable information] or practice good digital hygiene . Linkedln is strategically taking advantage of technology novices all the while fleecing money from limited library budgets." She added that the issue had been discussed on Connecticut library listservs and said that some librarians in the state had begun contacting their account representatives . "When pushed on the patron privacy concerns, [Linkedln Learning representatives] failed to adequately address the privacy concerns," Lee wrote . "As a result, a few libraries have reported that they would not be renewing their contracts with LyndaLibrary/Linkedln Learning." In a June 28 response to the nascent controversy titled "Our Commitment to Libraries ," Mike Derezin, VP of Learning Solutions for Linkedln, wrote that "the migration from Lynda.com to Linkedln Learning will give our library customers and their patrons access to 2x the learning content, in more languages, and with a more engaging experience." Derezin claimed that the use https://www.libraryjournal .com /?detailStory=criticism-of-linkedin-learnings-policies-grow s 1/2 8/7/2019 Criticism of LinkedIn Learning’s Policies Grows | Library Journal https://www.libraryjournal.com/?detailStory=criticism-of-linkedin-learnings-policies-grows 2/2 8/7/2019 ALA urges Linked In Learning to reconsider changes to terms of service that impair library users ' privacy rights I News and Press Center Attachment 2 ALA member 1 news (/news/) ALA urges Linkedln Learning to reconsider changes to terms of service that impair library users' privacy rights For Immediate Release Mon, 07/22/2019 Contact: Deborah Caldwell-Stone Interim Director Office for Intellectual Freedom American Library Association 312-280-4224 dstone@ala.org (mailto:dstone@ala.org) CHICAGO -Linked In Learning -formerly Lynda.com, a platform used by libraries to provide online learning opportunities to library users -plans to make substantial changes to its terms of service that would significantly impair library users' privacy rights. Under Linked In Learning's new terms of service, a library card holder will need to create a Linked In profile in order to access Linked In Learning. In addition to providing their library card number and PIN, users will have to disclose their full name and email address to create a new Linked In profile or connect to their existing profile. New users will have their Linked In profile set to public by default, allowing their full name to be searched on Google and Linkedln. ALA has long affirmed that the protection of library users' privacy and confidentiality rights are necessary for intellectual freedom and are fundamental to the ethical practice of librarianship. ALA's Library Bill of Rights (http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill) and its interpretations (http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/privacy) maintain that all library users have the right to access library resources without disclosing their personally identifiable information (Pl I) to third parties, and to be free from unreasonable intrusion into, or surveillance of, their lawful library use. "The requirement for users of Linked In Learning to disclose personally identifiable information is completely contrary to ALA policies addressing library users' privacy, and it may violate some states' library confidentiality laws," said ALA President Wanda Kay Brown. "It also violates the librarian's ethical obligation to keep a person's use of library resources confidential. We are deeply concerned about these changes to the terms of service and urge Linked In and its owner, Microsoft, to reconsider their position on this." ALA has long encouraged library vendors to respect the privacy and confidentiality of library users, observe the law, and conform to the professional statements of ethics that protect library users' privacy, including the ALA Code of Ethics (http://www.ala.org/tools/ethics) and the NISO Consensus Principles on Users' Digital Privacy in Library, Publisher, and Software-Provider Systems. (https://www.niso.org/publications/privacy- principles) www.ala.org/news/member-news/2019/07/ala-urges-linkedin-learning-reconsider-changes-terms-service-impair-library 1/2 8/7/2019 ALA urges LinkedIn Learning to reconsider changes to terms of service that impair library users’ privacy rights | News and Press Center www.ala.org/news/member-news/2019/07/ala-urges-linkedin-learning-reconsider-changes-terms-service-impair-library 2/2 (/news/feed/press- releases/rss.xml) Subscribe (/news/feed/press- releases/rss.xml) Libraries and librarians who wish to share their concerns about the proposed changes in to LinkedIn Learning’s terms of service and to voice their support for protecting library users’ privacy rights should communicate with Farhan Syed, Vice President of Client Solutions at fsyed@linkedin.com (mailto:fsyed@linkedin.com). Tags Intellectual Freedom (/news/taxonomy/term/786), Professional Resources (/news/taxonomy/term/1966), Public Awareness (/news/taxonomy/term/861), Intellectual Freedom Round Table (/news/taxonomy/term/640), American Library Association (/news/taxonomy/term/532), Office for Intellectual Freedom (/news/taxonomy/term/618) Attachment 3 Libraries guarantee patrons' privacy. That's why Linkedln's policy is so troubling By Greg Lucas and Erin Berman, Special to CalMatters One of the reasons communities place so much trust in their libraries is the privacy and confidentiality provided to everyone who uses their services. Ensuring the privacy and confidentiality of library users is fundamental to the operation of all libraries. Everywhere. It is an article of faith among librarians. Like many other states, California has placed these protections into law: "All patron use records of any library which is in whole or in part supported by public funds shall remain confidential and shall not be disclosed by a public agency, or private actor that maintains or stores patron use records on behalf of a public agency, to any person, local agency, or state agency ." But protecting someone else's privacy-let alone our own-is difficult in an age of frenzied social media sharing, not-so-impregnable firewalls, and marketers eager to better target their products. Most sellers of physical or digital information to libraries respect the primacy of user privacy. To maintain the community's trust, library vendors must adhere to the same code of ethics librarians employ every day. At the moment, Linkedln, the online business and employment service purchased by Microsoft in 2016 for $26.2 billion, is violating that ethical code and the policies set forth by the American Library Association. Linkedln is creating new usage rules for people at libraries who want to access Linked In Learning, formerly Lynda.com, an online learning platform that Linkedln acquired for $1.5 billion in 2015. Currently, when Lynda.com is accessed through a library, a user logs in with her or his library card and a PIN. No other personal information is required. Under the new Linkedln Learning policy, library users would be required to create a personal, publicly searchable, profile and agree to Linkedln 's user agreement and privacy policy before being able to use Linkedln Learning. Checking off the user agreement grants Linked In the power to share the information contained in a personal profile with whoever Linkedln wants. Representatives from libraries around the country have met with LinkedIn, asking that they respect the privacy rights of library users. To date, LinkedIn has refused to do so, stating that the requirement to create a LinkedIn profile is a security measure to prevent fraudulent access to LinkedIn’s content. These new accounts will be subject to an artificial intelligence tool that determines if a person is a real user, LinkedIn says. This removes the authority of libraries to authenticate who is a real user or not. When asked why a public social media profile is the only option for authenticating users, LinkedIn told libraries that the “library market” wasn’t a significant enough revenue stream to warrant creation of a custom solution. Bottom-line: The new policy being adopted by LinkedIn Learning, forces patrons to share their personal information to access a library resource. Doing so violates every possible definition of privacy and makes it antithetical to the values at the core of what libraries and librarians stand for. No wonder the American Library Association hasexpressed concern over LinkedIn Learning’s terms of service. Hopefully, LinkedIn Learning will modify its policy to respect the privacy of library users. Until then, the California State Library and a growing number of libraries across the country respectfully urge the use of information resources at public libraries that don’t expose patrons’ personally identifiable information and keeps their library use free from unreasonable intrusion or surveillance. — Greg Lucas is the State Librarian of California, greg.lucas@library.ca.gov. Erin Berman is a division director at Alameda County Library and chair of the American Library Association’s Intellectual Freedom Committee’s Privacy Subcommittee, erinberman@aclibrary.org. They wrote this commentary for CalMatters. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU 8/7/2019 Unkind Rewind Attachment 4 INSIDE HIGHER ED Published on Inside Higher Ed (httRs://www.insidehighered.com) Home > Unkind Re wind Unkind Rewind Submitted by Barbara Fister on June 26 , 2019 -7 :24pm Blog: Library Babel Fish [11 I noticed the other day that someone was mad at the New York Public Library for dropping Kanopy, a film streaming service. My response was "yeah, libraries are dropping it all over the place because its freaking expensive ." (The Brooklyn and Queens Pls, which are separate from NYPL, are also dropping the service.) My next thought was "and dear lord , we have been here before , so many times ." But before I could put that into words, my respected colleague and friend @LibSkrat beat me to it [21 with some pointed commentary. To recap : Kanopy is one of the vendors libraries turn to for bundled content, in this case films. The more people get used to streaming at home, the more libraries feel they have to provide it, too, but it's very expensive, the invoices keep streaming in along with the video , and what you get the bundle , which may not be the videos your community actually wants to see . (Sound familiar?) Behind all this are the creators, distributors, and other middle-folk who want their piece of the action and can pull content out without warning , as well as the investors -a private equity firm invested in Kanopy recently, and they tend to want their profits. In an academic library environment, this makes it tricky when you have to pay again and again for the ability to stream a video that a faculty member uses in a course taught every other year -and then might have that video drop out of the package without warning . Public library users have different concerns, but generally films, like books and journal articles, are fairly non-substitutable . What kicked up all the ruckus wasn't just that a library was dropping a bundle of digital stuff it could no longer afford, but the way library users found out about it. They got an email from Kanopy, personally addressed to them by https://www.insidehighered.com/prin t/blogs /library-babel-fish/unkind-rew ind 1/3 8/7/2019 Unkind Rewind https://www.insidehighered.com/print/blogs/library-babel-fish/unkind-rewind 2/3 name, to express how disappointed the company was. It’s creepy and wrong for vendors to use patron information (the privacy of which is often protected by law) to essentially make a sneaky sales pitch. Additionally, the end users don’t know how much things cost, and many library licenses include a non- disclosure clause. (Follow the University of Virginia’s lead [3] and strike them out – they are unacceptable.) Even if the information is not deliberately concealed, it’s not widely known. Kanopy charges a fee if so little as 30 seconds of a film is viewed, and if three patrons watch a film it, it triggers a bill of around $150. For one year. Then you start over. Even if few people use the service – NYPL estimates only 1 percent of their patrons have – the costs add up. In contrast, a library can purchase copies of films on DVD and share them without extra fees tacked on. Owning a physical copy comes with more rights than a license conveys, but libraries have a habit of assuming they will become instantly irrelevant if they don’t sign on for digital deals. We’ve done this so, so many times. A vendor offers a package that seems pretty good. Wow, that’s a lot of content! And that one-size-fits-all approach sure saves time, not having to match content to your users’ interests. Then people get used to the convenience and it’s hard to pull the plug when the price goes up. And up. And up. People who pay ten bucks for an ebook beach read and drop 9 bucks a month for Netflix don’t know that the beach read borrowed for free from a library costs the library many times more than a hardcover, can only be used by one person at a time, and has to be paid for again after it has been borrowed a couple of dozen times. They don’t know that video streaming isn’t like Netflix and isn’t free after all [4]. My advice for library users is don’t yell at libraries if they have to drop a service. It’s not their fault, and arguing that we should just give them more money doesn’t solve the always-rising cost problem. For librarians, my advice is to resist the shiny and trust we are relevant, to value the rights we traditionally have when we purchase content, and push for transparency and 8/7/2019 Unkind Rewind https://www.insidehighered.com/print/blogs/library-babel-fish/unkind-rewind 3/3 fairness in licensing deals. I know, we do – but somehow, we keep falling for the same schtick. Barbara Fister [5] Source URL: https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/library-babel-fish/unkind-rewind Links [1] https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/library-babel-fish [2] https://twitter.com/LibSkrat/status/1143512430024245248 [3] https://www.library.virginia.edu/policies/nondisclosure-clauses-in-licenses/ [4] https://filmquarterly.org/2019/05/03/kanopy-not-just-like-netflix-and-not-free/ [5] https://www.insidehighered.com/users/barbara-fister