The US National Archives has inked another commercial deal to sell public domain materials. In this case, film and video. The “non-exclusive” agreement is with Amazon.com’s CustomFlix Labs, who will let you initially buy on-demand DVDs of any of “thousands” of Universal Newsreels, dating from 1920 to 1967 from the Archives collection.

This is similar in feel to the earlier deal with Footnote, from whom you can buy online access to historic documents and photographs from the Archives.

Archivist of the United States Allen Weinstein spins it this way:

Our initiative with CustomFlix Labs will reap major benefits for the public-at-large and for the National Archives. While the public can come to our College Park, MD research room to view films and even copy them at no charge, this new program will make our holdings much more accessible to millions of people who cannot travel to the Washington, DC area. CustomFlix Labs DVD on Demand will provide the National Archives with digital reference and preservation copies of the films that are sold on Amazon.com. This is an important contribution to our preservation program.

The Archivist fails to mention why it’s necessary for the US Government agency to make a commercial deal and charge the public to get these benefits.

Perhaps the Archives could take a lesson from the Library of Congress’ highly successful American Memory program for tips about how to make archival works available online without charging the public for them.

Or ask advice of the folks at the Internet Archives, who already have over 600 of these same vintage newsreels up and freely available.

See the NARA Press Release of 30 July 2007.

_________________

Added 3 August

Apparently American Historical Association blogger Andrew Britt thinks the deal is a good idea, too.

I’ve also just seen the Washington Post article on the subject.

Nina Gilden Seavey, an “Emmy-winning filmmaker and director of the Documentary Center at George Washington University” is quoted in that piece, noting the key issue with which the Archives is dealing:

Ultimately, the accessibility of the collections and the maintenance of the collections has become such a huge burden on the federal government, the question is how to provide some sort of self-sustaining mechanism for use of these collections.

I agree this is a burden. A burden however, that comes with the mission of the agency.

In the face of scarce resources, apparently the only option considered was commercializing the collection.

That’s my gripe here.

Welcome to the third Military History Carnival! Here you’ll find a random and eclectic selection of recent blog posts talking about military history of one kind or another. These are hardly an exhaustive survey of all military history posts, obviously, but may point you to new time sinks for future enjoyment.

Saddle up! (more…)

When it rains, it pours goes the old saw. For the last couple of weeks I’ve been up to my ear lobes in two proposal writing projects. I expect two more by the end of March. The normal pace is two in a year. These are good for business, but hard on my personal and online lives.

This time crunch has tightly focused the effort I told you about in a December post about an off-the-shelf content management system (CMS) as basis for a website. To recap: I’m working a pro bono project to help a worthy historical non-profit upgrade their online presence. Last we talked I had built a demo website on WordPress and was planning to migrate to the more sophisticated Textpattern platform.

I just won’t have time for that anytime soon, and the non-profit wants to publish fast. So, after some reassuring research, I’ve decided to stick with WordPress and avoid the learning curve and rework needed to implement on Textpattern.

Why?

First, there is an array of proven plugins and custom modules available for WordPress to meet all the likely business needs of the client. Just ask Lorelle, for instance. Sure, there is danger that too many plugins or widgets will result in Lego architecture, but for the few functions we’re considering, I think the maintenance burden will be low.

Second, the client wants to implement new functions and features iteratively–one at a time at a moderate pace–so I will have opportunity to write custom PHP within the WordPress framework or bite the bullet and convert to a new platform later, if worst comes to worst.

It comes down to the fastest and easiest way to get function online with minimum investment.

I’d appreciate hearing from anyone with similar projects: I need all the advice I can get! I’ll keep you up on how it goes …

In contrast to Wednesday’s Library of Congress announcement, the following highlights significant cultural change in not quite seven years. Let me disclaim up front by saying I really appreciate the organizational attitude change apparent since the following was reported, and imply no criticism of the Library or Librarian of Congress.

(April 15, 2000 – Tech Law Journal) The Librarian of Congress, James Billington, gave an address at the National Press Club on Friday, April 14, on the role of the Library of Congress in the Information Age. He harshly criticized the Internet, and stated that the Library will not digitize books. However, the Library has plans to expand its web publication of other materials.

“So far, the Internet seems to be largely amplifying the worst features of television’s preoccupation with sex and violence, semi-literate chatter, shortened attention spans, and near-total subservience to commercial marketing,” said Billington.

Billington said that the Library of Congress has plans to unveil a new web site. “We hope it will realize one of the earliest promises of the Internet: to put the Library of Congress at the fingertips of every boy and girl where they live.”

But then he followed up by stating the “we are not digitizing books, but bringing hitherto little used, specially formatted materials like maps and recordings …” He added that the new web site “is not replacing our traditional print library.”

He said that the Library of Congress now has 28 Million items in its print collection, and 119 Million items in all formats. Its web site currently contains 3 million primary documents, including drafts of the Gettysburg Address, 19th Century baseball cards, and forgotten music.

Billington elaborated on why the Library will not put books online during the question and answer session. “The rationale is two fold. We have so much special format material that nobody has seen that it is more important to get those out.” He added that the Library is more concerned with “rare pamphlets” than “full books”.

“Secondly, behind this … is an implicit belief [that books] are not going to be replaced, and should not be replaced.”

“There is a difference between turning pages and scrolling down,” he said. “There is something about a book that should inspire a certain presumption of reverence.”

“We should be very hesitant … that you are going to get everything you want electronically.”

“You don’t want to be one of those mindless futurists,” said Billington, “who sit in front of a lonely screen.”

“It is isolating. It is a lonely thing.” In contrast, “libraries are places, a community thing.”

“It is dangerous to promote the illusion that you can get anything you want by sitting in front of a computer screen.” He described this as “arrogance” and “hubris”.

He added that while electronic books may succeed commercially, they are “seductive.”

The LoC website now makes available more than 7.5 million digital objects from its American Memory site alone, and the new project looks to add thousands. To be fair, the Library is still not talking about digitizing books generally, but I’d bet Dr. Billington feels slightly differently about the Web–or at least would be embarrased to say some of these things–today.