To me this also suggests that if you own or control one of these texts that its literally your duty to the rest of humanity to make sure it's scanned and available for free and infinite copying SOMEWHERE.
We might lose track of the digital version but without it it's inevitable that these volumes will decay and be lost forever.
What is the the general ethical stance about this in the rare book community?
The rare book community is the community that has facilitated these crimes. There are more black hats than white hats--no money at all for white hats in this business.
Private book traders make all their money by selling unique items to rich people. The rich people doing the buying want to own something special that other people can't have.
Bibliophiles are technophobes. They love the paper page, the book binding, the book stacks. They don't love the content of the books, and they don't want to share them. They have "aristocratic" ideas about who deserves to have access to these special items. Every last one of them is a hoarder that wants to have things that others can't have.
They hate book scanners. They hate ebooks. They hate digitization. It just threatens their business, their status, their one-of-a-kinds.
Rare books is all about prestige and exclusivity. Digitization is a threat to this.
I'm a book scanner--someone who loves the contents of books more than the objects--and my kind are scorned like the gargoyles from Snow Crash.
I don't get the logic here. If they love the book and not the content, why do they care if the content is available.
Moreover, the availability of pictures of Mona Lisa is a big part of its popularity. Wouldn't you rather own the only copy of a famous atlas, then an obscure one?
>If they love the book and not the content, why do they care if the content is available.
They want to have something that others can't have.
>Wouldn't you rather own the only copy of a famous atlas, then an obscure one?
Some would, but there are plenty who prefer the obscurity. Most aristocrats are more interested in impressing their friends and immediate circle with off-beat style than in starting a popular museum or being seen as gaudy. Obscurity is hip--and sometimes it can even be affordable.
This is a video of the Scribe machine that the Internet Archive built for book scanning. It uses two commodity digital cameras to image the pages. The computer driving the process is running Linux and gPhoto. They're also working on a tabletop version, which will be easier for smaller institutions to set up and use.
Any book that is a "cultural heritage" item needs to be scanned, and it's the duty of the library/museum to do it. The scans don't even have to be that good - a photo with a hand-held iphone is good enough for a quick first pass.
If budget is a problem, scan a couple, sell them, and use the proceeds to scan the rest.
I'd extend that to "anything which is now in the public domain".
a photo with a hand-held iphone is good enough for a quick first pass
Not to mention far less damaging to the original since it doesn't have to be manipulated as much, and quicker too. Distortion is a problem but postprocessing can give good results.
The last time I was at a library, which seems like ages ago, there were (paid) photocopiers for those who wanted to copy a page or two. With everyone carrying high-res cameras in their pockets, I wonder if they're still around.
People who scan rare books seem to be obsessed with pixel perfect scans, and so what happens is it doesn't get done. A 90% scan is infinitely better than no scan when the library burns down or the books are stolen.
Heck, the libraries in the article didn't even know what they had, so they don't know what was lost.
If you want to learn more about this kind of crime, I highly recommend a little book by Miles Harvey called THE ISLAND OF LOST MAPS: A TRUE STORY OF CARTOGRAPHIC CRIME. Fascinating whodunit regarding thieves who would go into rare book collections and quietly use a razor blade to carefullytear out an ancient map inside some hundreds-of-years-old book, and often then sell it for huge sums.
Part of the impact of these thefts is difficulty of legitimate access by the public.
Allow me to explain with an example literally from a few days ago. I turned up in Madrid for a few days, and visited the national library wanting to see what they held both in terms of materials regarding the area of China I am compiling a history on, and in terms of early Spanish records of island Southeast Asian (eg. Philippines) multihull vessels like the vinta.
I am forced to go through airport-like security, have my face recorded on an Axis IP-based CCTV camera, sent to a room with three enormous desks each with an official library bureaucrat. I explain my case, and am rapidly informed that should I wish to view anything at all before 1950 then I must apply for a research card. Sure! What does that require? Photo ID - passport, check. Proof of address - what? Bank statement accepted, download one, OK, check. Proof you are from an inexplicit list of recognized national, educational or cultural institutions. I'm an admin for Wikipedia, writing articles specifically on traditional multihull vessels that have hundreds of thousands of pageviews and have been front page featured, but that didn't seem to count. They wouldn't let me in. The 'librarian' (who I feel deserves no such title) actually went so far as to attempt to 'explain' to me - "You see, it's like a club. The universities, the libraries, ...".
That very same night, I had dinner after visiting a diplomat in their home. Some friends of theirs were also present, one of whom a reigning library science academic of repute within that field in Madrid and Spain. I explained the horrible experience I had attempting to dedicate some of my minimal time in the city to using their national library. In return, it was explained that the difficulty of using the place is a direct response to the theft of a number of extremely rare texts some years ago, over which people lost their jobs. The problem is frequent, and even international academics all face it. I was of course also offered a letter of reference, but did not have enough time left in the city to visit a second time... so the resources remain unconsulted. (The irony of the fact that we dined on Mahgreb cuisine was not lost on me: the former Muslim rulers of Cordoba/Andalusia were great sponsors of libraries, translation and learning in general.)
Moral of the story, then, is perhaps that the real loser is the public: paying for increased security, losing access to the stolen items, but critically - being denied access at all for legitimate inquiry, thereby making a mockery of the purpose of the institutions in the first place.
The best possible thing would be to digitize the originals... this removes the need to visit by making them more accessible, allows backups to secure against disaster, theft or loss by other means, and increases the value of the originals (because people know they exist, cite and use them). British Library want some godawful amount like 400GBP to photograph old images they hold. It's daylight bloody robbery, especially coming from these colonial countries that stole their damn holdings. The EU should force libraries to digitize this stuff.
I can't see a reason a Freedom of Information Act request wouldn't be proper against the contents of BL held photographs assuming the photos are out of copyright.
The "freedom" they refer to there is probably "free as in libre", not "free as in gratis" - they are allowed to provide you with that information, and if it's public-domain you can do whatever you want with it afterwards, but they are allowed to charge you for the labour of doing it.
AIUI under FoI they can charge an admin fee, IIRC that's of the order of £10. That would be considerably cheaper than £400 mentioned.
<a few seconds of research ensues ...>
https://www.justice.gov.uk/information-access-rights/foi-gui... mentions £25 per hour. Assuming that the images are already on BL computers somewhere then them providing a link or sending them by email would likely be a couple of minutes; with admin certainly within the hour.
FoI is about free-libre but they can't put financial blocks in the way as that's undemocratic, it would make the FoI only accessible to the rich.
Assuming that the images are already on BL computers somewhere then them providing a link or sending them by email would likely be a couple of minutes; with admin certainly within the hour.
I read his comment as meaning they haven't digitised them (yet), and BL wants £400 to do it. Not that I agree with charging that much as I think they should've done that already, but if he's asking for a bunch of large, old, and fragile images, it could be delicate and time-consuming work.
This sounds like a case of an omelet requiring broken eggs. While you may not find yourself in Madrid any time soon and this experience could have lasting impact on the work you'd like to have done, a reality is emerging that this is a good thing to check on before visiting. Early Spanish presence in the Philippines is like the 16-17th century? It makes sense to validate visitors in advance, and my sense doesn't even matter if that's just the name of the game from now on. A bonus for checking in advance may be that even if registration isn't required, you might get special treatment or help once you do get there.
> I'm an admin for Wikipedia, writing articles specifically on traditional multihull vessels that have hundreds of thousands of pageviews and have been front page featured, but that didn't seem to count. They wouldn't let me in.
Welcome to what it's like for any actual authority on a subject to write on Wikipedia. That's just karma, right there.
To me this also suggests that if you own or control one of these texts that its literally your duty to the rest of humanity to make sure it's scanned and available for free and infinite copying SOMEWHERE.
We might lose track of the digital version but without it it's inevitable that these volumes will decay and be lost forever.
What is the the general ethical stance about this in the rare book community?