I read the recent flurry of posts about problems with Lexis Law Publishing
with interest, and confess that we, too, have had our conversations with
the famous Vinnie :)
But I also wondered as I read the posts whether or not the writers had
formally reported the problems to CRIV or were just posting to the list.
I do my share of that, at times to get a quick reading on whether a
problem is unique to our library or perhaps more generally known, or just
to alert others to something weird/wrong that they may also discover
regarding their accounts. I'll undoubtedly continue to post things like
that.
However, the official way within AALL to resolve vendor problems is
through CRIV, and I suspect that the majority of us who post to lawlib do
that instead of sending something formal to CRIV to document a problem and
to ask for help in resolving it. Maybe we're frustrated, or maybe we
haven't found CRIV to be responsive -- or maybe we just forget, because
it's so easy to simply post a message.
The CRIV web site has an online complaint form that hopefully is read more
often than the web site is updated :) But at least it's there, and it's
easier for me to complete a web form than sit down and write an official
letter. Address: http://www.aallnet.org/committee/criv/summary.htm
Just a gentle reminder.
Anne
(who's not a member of CRIV and wasn't bribed to send this message)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Anne Myers |
Head of Technical Services | Internet: amyers@bu.edu
Boston University Law Library | Phone: 617-353-8877
765 Commonwealth Avenue | Fax: 617-353-5995
Boston, MA 02215 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 12:29:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Kai-Yun Chiu <kchiu@bcpl.net>
To: law-lib@ucdavis.edu
My open letter to LEXIS Law Publishing generated quite a number of
responses. As I read them, I was amazed, outraged and saddened. The
letters revealed just how much we law librarians have been pushed around,
bullied and harassed by the accounts receivable departments of the law
publishers in complying to their unreasonable demands. I even started to
wonder whether we should shoulder some of the blame ourselves for the way
we are being treated. Obviously publishers have no reason to improve
their inefficient operations or to care about law librarians when for
years, we law librarians have been willing to go the extra miles (and
miles, and miles) for them. What should be considered as a good will
gesture results in our being taken advantage of. To the law publishers
it is a given that the law librarians will and should do the extra work
for them. It is the exception rather than the rule if someone does not
comply. Hence, if you do not do what I ask you to do, we put your account
on hold. We will defame your reputation by telling your boss the untruth
that you are having personal problems which are affecting your work.
Maybe Vinnie is the best employee at LEXIS/Michie because she can be
nasty, threatening and bully the law librarians into submission. She
achieves her goals. LEXIS/Michie gets what it wants. Law librarians keep
on "cooperating". To the law publishers, everything works fine. Doesn't
it? From the standpoint of law publishers, why overhaul operations when
they function perfectly well? Just hire a few more nasty employees. My
questions are: Is our time so worthless? In aggregate, how much time have
we spent on "cooperating" with the publishers? Is it our obligation to
spend extra time repeatedly in order to resolve someone else's problems?
The letters clearly demonstrate that accounts receivable operations of
some publishers have been an on-going problem to law librarians for some
time. Is it time that CRIV and even AALL do something about it?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:49:54 PST