DCMS consultation on e-lending in libraries

The DCMS is currently conducting a consultation on the topic of e-learning in libraries. It would be useful to make a submission to this. The closing date for responses is 5pm on Tuesday 6 November, so there isn't much time. They are asking for views on six themes, listed below. Please do feel free to contribute and help to shape our response. Thank you. --Stevie Benton (WMUK) (talk) 13:58, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

If contributions could be made and a final response reached by 3.30pm on Tuesday 6 November that allows us time to make a final submission. Thanks. --Stevie Benton (WMUK) (talk) 14:01, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

The panel are considering the following areas, and welcome submissions from any interested parties:

1. The benefits of e-lending

Wikipedia is possibly the most read "book" on the internet with about 400 million users per month. The charity commission argued that Wikimedia UK represent the modern equivalent of a reading room. The community who create the encyclopedia would not consider e-lending Wikipedia. We believe information should be freely available. In our case we do not charge and there is no clear owner of he information. Allowing users to borrow our information would be a retrograde step.

e-lending appears to impose a superseded business model onto a new technology which doesn't support this concept.

2. The current level and nature of demand

The current level and nature of demand for e-lending in English libraries, along with a projection of future demand. For example, will e-lending be in addition to traditional borrowing of print books, or is it likely to transform the way in which library users access services? What is the demand for downloading e-books remotely, that is, away from library premises? To what extent do owners of e-readers value public e-lending above what is freely or commercially available elsewhere?

3. Current supply models

Current supply models, barriers to the supply of e-books to libraries, and likely future trends

4. Systems for remunerating authors / publishers for e-lending

Wikipedia's model means that the traditional role of the publisher is mostly superseded. If you want to create a paper copy of Wikipedia then any user can do this. We do not charge for publication and our quality levels are initially quite low. One role of the publisher however is still necessary. Publishers create a mark of quality. Our community still sorts through articles and decides on a level of quality for articles in our "book".

The barriers to publication are very low. We do not remunerate our authors or our publishers and this model works. The existence of Wikipedia shows that a lot of traditional information models no longer apply. If we were to imagine that we would reward our authors then the system required would be more complex than our encyclopedia. Authors create sentences that others modify, delete and add to. We would not know how to divide any remuneration to our author even if was available and they were willing to take it.

6. Any unforeseen consequences

Any unforeseen consequences of e-lending. For example, the impact on those who cannot keep up with technology, the likely long-term impact on the model of highly localised physical library premises, skills requirements for librarians, etc