Do you want the Librarians to replicate this act? Librarians need to act on facts – at least documentary evidence …

cheers, Hoggishly.

I also think libraries are quick to grab at new technologies just to prove we’re Library 2.0, without thinking about how they fit into the overall plan for the library. I know this is a “baaad librarian” statement, but I’d rather offer services I can demonstrate my patrons want to use, even if they’re not cutting edge, than offer a lot of Library 2.0 services that are just going to waste.

That said, there are of course patrons that want us to simply hand them answers. I find it quite easy to suss out those folks and I tend to spend less time with them, but when we have time and when the patron shows any interest, we need to consciously teach them what we can. I’m very fortunate to work in an institution and a specific library that highly values teaching at the reference desk. While I realize that many librarians don’t have the time or sufficient staffing to spend 15, or 30 or 60 minutes with patrons at the desk, this kind of individualized, one-to-one interaction is an extremely valuable and effective way to teach.

Many public librarians teach in more formal, time-intensive ways as well. Many public libraries offer a variety of classes, workshops and/or homework help programs. They host book clubs during which patrons learn from each other. As you mention, folks love online tutorials. So, there are many ways in which libraries are already offering instruction.

One more point: as an English major working in an academic health sciences library, I learn from my patrons as much as I teach. I’ve learned there is no shame is saying, “Oh, I don’t know very much about that topic. Could you briefly explain some of the basics to me?” Not only do I learn this way, but it succinctly defining their research topic often helps patrons in their searching. Teaching and learning are inherently cooperative processes, in my mind.

Then, of course, there is the fundamental change in what access to information entails. The model has been that you purchase something, and part of what you gain through purchase is the right to control how you personally use that information. Witn DRM the model changes to leasing the information, and what rights you get with that lease are totally controlled by the provider of the information you “signed” the DRM contract with. This is a huge change, and one that has at least some possibility to hamper innovation in the future.

Again many of the points you mention relate to the implementation of DRM. I totally agree that there are many issue, such as the Microsoft one pointed out in your comment. These issues need to be addressed and if I was a Microsoft customer, I would definitely be thinking class action about now.

Yes there are copyright laws, but enforcement of those laws are near impossible and is often seen as too intrusive. Would you rather have DRM or a federally mandated spyware program on your personal computers and devices to enforce copyright?

Placing DRM on purchased products goes against my grain, but on “loaned” products, I still have great sympathy for it. As for artists really prefering there not to be DRM, well that is their choice. If the do not want to have DRM placed on their music, then they can find a different label or self publish. But to expect the record label or publisher to not try and protect their investment is not realistic.

I still believe that DRM is not perfect and may never be so, but you have not convinced me to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Again, thanks for your comment.