<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gale&#8217;s Hopeless Request</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/</link>
	<description>Whatever It Is, I&#039;m Against It</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 23:19:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: F8CBF</title>
		<link>http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/comment-page-1/#comment-1225</link>
		<dc:creator>F8CBF</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/#comment-1225</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wuould like to see the ALA lead a movement towards librarians having fine-grained control over ABC programs/buying profiles. Without this kind of control we buy, process, whip, store, display, withdraw and dispose of a lot of material which simply never circulates. (I am thinking of mainly non-ficton here.)

We need a large number of people to ask for this, or the distributors will continue to treat libraries as simple (-minded) generators of cash.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wuould like to see the ALA lead a movement towards librarians having fine-grained control over ABC programs/buying profiles. Without this kind of control we buy, process, whip, store, display, withdraw and dispose of a lot of material which simply never circulates. (I am thinking of mainly non-ficton here.)</p>
<p>We need a large number of people to ask for this, or the distributors will continue to treat libraries as simple (-minded) generators of cash.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Che</title>
		<link>http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/comment-page-1/#comment-1226</link>
		<dc:creator>Che</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 14:14:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/#comment-1226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Vendors are evil.

Information wants -- NEEDS -- to be free.

Let my bytes go.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vendors are evil.</p>
<p>Information wants &#8212; NEEDS &#8212; to be free.</p>
<p>Let my bytes go.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan</title>
		<link>http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/comment-page-1/#comment-1227</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:38:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/#comment-1227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Vendors have been peddling bigger royalties in exchange for exclusive rights for years. The sales pitch said that the exclusivity clause will grant content providers with a larger royalty payout. That IS possible, I suppose, but I always believed that getting many more downloads of material (by carrying it on multiple vendor databases) would offset and surpass the potential earnings promised by enhanced royalty percentage. Now vendors are bundling other goodies into the enhanced royalty pitch...be it making juicy Web tools or other software available to the content providers. Regardless, exclusivity in and of itself is a good deal for the vendor and a bad one for consumers and content providers.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vendors have been peddling bigger royalties in exchange for exclusive rights for years. The sales pitch said that the exclusivity clause will grant content providers with a larger royalty payout. That IS possible, I suppose, but I always believed that getting many more downloads of material (by carrying it on multiple vendor databases) would offset and surpass the potential earnings promised by enhanced royalty percentage. Now vendors are bundling other goodies into the enhanced royalty pitch&#8230;be it making juicy Web tools or other software available to the content providers. Regardless, exclusivity in and of itself is a good deal for the vendor and a bad one for consumers and content providers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jenjen</title>
		<link>http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/comment-page-1/#comment-1228</link>
		<dc:creator>jenjen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/#comment-1228</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Don&#039;t criticize Gale or they&#039;ll take away our conference buses.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t criticize Gale or they&#8217;ll take away our conference buses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rich Uncle Pennybags</title>
		<link>http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/comment-page-1/#comment-1229</link>
		<dc:creator>Rich Uncle Pennybags</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:20:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/#comment-1229</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[C&#039;mon AL, stop talking about business things.

Libraries are groovy places where information just wants to be free, stop talking about money and subscriptions and contracts and icky stuff like that.

When information is totally free, the librarians will have won.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>C&#8217;mon AL, stop talking about business things.</p>
<p>Libraries are groovy places where information just wants to be free, stop talking about money and subscriptions and contracts and icky stuff like that.</p>
<p>When information is totally free, the librarians will have won.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Don</title>
		<link>http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/comment-page-1/#comment-1230</link>
		<dc:creator>The Don</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 06:38:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lj.libraryjournal.com/blogs/annoyedlibrarian/2010/02/01/gales-hopeless-request/#comment-1230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Youse better support Gale you youse just might find your mailbox stuffed with renewal cards.

If you know what I mean.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Youse better support Gale you youse just might find your mailbox stuffed with renewal cards.</p>
<p>If you know what I mean.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

 Served from: lj.libraryjournal.com @ 2013-05-22 19:45:31 by W3 Total Cache -->