LOCKSS and OpenLOCKSSAdam Rusbridge and William J Nixon

UKSG Breakout SessionApril 2008

Session Outline

• LOCKSS• UK LOCKSS Pilot Programme

– Stakeholders– OpenLOCKSS– Reflections– Lessons Learned– Next Steps

What is LOCKSS

• Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe– http://www.lockss.org

• Unique, peer-to-peer archiving model– tool to ensure libraries remain memory

organisations, custodians of digital content– preservation no longer a side-effect of

distribution• economically stable model that benefits both

libraries and publishers– helps libraries fulfil collection development role– does not interfere with publisher sales

The LOCKSS System

• Large number of independent and persistent collections of content relevant to library goals

– library collections overlap sufficiently to provide replication higher than for centralised system

– Publisher uploads manifest page• containing the LOCKSS permission statement• list of volumes an institution is authorised to collect in

their LOCKSS box– LOCKSS collects the material direct from publisher

• Plugin defines ‘rules’ identifying content corresponding to journal volumes

• Collected and preserved in local LOCKSS box

• Long term survival of data requires regular audit of infrequently accessed bitstreams

– continuous 'round robin' polling audit algorithm used to verify content

The LOCKSS System

• In event of data loss, retrieval from publisher is first attempted

– Otherwise, retrieval from trusted peer with whom you have previously polled.

• LOCKSS box designed to integrate into institutional proxy network

– Requests for content always forwarded to publisher• Publisher can identify content usage

– Only served if publisher fails to respond• content no longer available• publisher unavailable

LOCKSS Box

• A library's LOCKSS box– Does not require significant system

administration– Numerous features dedicated to ensuring

platform security• reboot to restore

– Twice yearly upgrade process is straightforward and fast

Background to the Pilot

• JISC E-journal Archiving Study in 2003 highlighted emerging developments (i.e. LOCKSS, JSTOR Electronic Archiving Initiative - predecessor of Portico, UK legal deposit and OCLC Digital Archive).

• JISC NESLi2 Model Licence archive clauses (from 2006) provided a measure of assurance for libraries. Concerns about enforcement mechanisms.

• British Library E-journal Digital Archive

• CLIR (Council on Library and Information Resources) report: E-Journal Archiving Metes and Bounds: A Survey of the Landscape.

– JISC-funded Review and Analysis, by Maggie Jones

UK LOCKSS Pilot Programme

• Distributed LOCKSS environment requires– investment by libraries– centralised coordination and support

• Two-year pilot launched in February 2006– jointly funded by JISC / CURL

• Stakeholders– Libraries– Publishers– Central Bodies and Negotiation Agencies– Digital Curation Centre (DCC) LOCKSS

Technical Support Service

LOCKSS Pilot Objectives

• Raise awareness of the LOCKSS initiative.

• Seed a self-sustaining base of LOCKSS users in the UK– provide libraries with the practical help to get started– develop the skills needed to run their LOCKSS nodes

• Study the LOCKSS technology in an operational environment

• Investigate the challenges associated with collective preservation of a major proportion of the e-journals in common use in the JISC community.

• Build a centre of expertise outside the US, feeding the lessons learned back for the benefit of the international LOCKSS community.

• Allow the JISC community to make informed assessments regarding the most appropriate future use of LOCKSS

UK Libraries

• University of Birmingham

• Cambridge University Library

• Cardiff University

• De Montfort University

• University of Durham

• University of East London

• University of Edinburgh

• University of Exeter

• University of Glasgow

• University of Hertfordshire

• University of Hull

• Kings' College London

• University of Liverpool

• Loughborough University

• University of Manchester

• Middlesex University

• University of Newcastle Upon Tyne

• Oxford University

• University of Sheffield

• University of St Andrews

• University of Surrey

• UCL Library Services

• University of Wolverhampton

• University of York

• Associate Members:

• University of Bristol

• University of Huddersfield

• University of Leicester

• London School of Economics and Political Science

• University of Sussex

• University of Warwick

Libraries and LOCKSS

• Benefits of Participation

– Libraries are important memory organizations; ensure their relevance.

• LOCKSS supports library's mission• Libraries have most at stake: key for them to be part of the

solution

– Community Participation

– Control of Assets• Long term investment in collections

– Control of Infrastructure

• Low cost solution

– Minimise maintenance costs by using open source software

– Reduce system administration costs through automation

– Minimise user education costs by integrating with standard library technologies

Glasgow’s Motivations

• Online provision of current and older volume of journals continues to expand

• Plans for the reallocation of printed journals are ongoing

• Academic Staff have raised questions about permanent online access

• Preservation tools and solutions needed:– If we are to discharge our responsibilities to support

research and teaching– To demonstrate our commitment to preservation and,

critically, perpetual access

• LOCKSS and Portico – E-Journal Insurance

Publishers and LOCKSS

• Benefits of Participation– LOCKSS preserves original article look and feel,

keeping publisher branding intact

– No fee to participate

– LOCKSS ensures uninterrupted access to content even when the publisher's site is down

– International adoption - growing community– Helps introduce publisher titles to new markets

– Shared responsibility for curation

– Keeps their customers – libraries - happy

UK Publishers

• Outcomes of UK Pilot Activity:– Signed and available to archive:

• Royal Society of Chemistry• Annual Reviews

– Signed and available soon:• Taylor and Francis• Cambridge University Press• British Psychological Society• Royal Society

Content in the UK LOCKSS Programme

• Content key to the UK Pilot– Critical issue: how to bring more content into

LOCKSS?– What is the most appropriate content type to

focus on?

• Large Commercial Publishers– Correlation between budget expenditure and

awareness• High library demand for these publishers

– However• Publisher's business model and economic stability

means these assets are exposed to low risk

– CLOCKSS

Content in the UK LOCKSS Programme

• Small, Medium and Closed Publishers– Range of publishers and their status means they

are potentially more exposed– Build upon the NESLi2-SMP work

• Adherence to Post-termination and archiving clauses (8.4-8.10) a requirement for participation

• Ideally, integrate archival agreements into NESLi2-SMP negotiations

– Logical step to push forward with LOCKSS compliance

• Open Access Publishers– The most fragile and ephemeral– Numerous

Central Bodies and Negotiation Agents

• JISC are in a strong position to coordinate activity

• Content Complete Ltd have undertaken negotiation work for NESLi2 content– Integrate LOCKSS negotiations into Content Complete

Ltd workflow as standard

• What about non-NESLi2 content– negotiations led by LOCKSS Technical Support

Service?

– How can central identification of titles occur?• JISC Journals Working Group• JISC Library Advisory Working Group

Community Development

• It is the shared responsibility of libraries to take appropriate measures to safeguard digital content

• Appropriate and thorough Collection Development Mechanisms required– Title Identification: Discussion between Subject

Specialists– Build into existing organisational structures

• e.g. CURL• Local Consortia• For advocacy, identification and negotiations

OpenLOCKSS

• Funded by JISC• Ran from March to August 2007• Project Staff

– Tony Kidd (Project Director)– Laura Galloway– William J Nixon– Adam Rusbridge

• Built on the Oct 06 Open Access Survey• Contacted 28 Publishers (32 Titles)• Received 19 Positive responses• First plug-ins now available

Deliverables

• Agree with 12-15 journals on participation in LOCKSS

• Ensure the availability of publisher manifest pages for participating journals

• Write appropriate plug-ins• Agree hosting among LOCKSS Pilot

Project participants• Write publicity and information material

about LOCKSS for Open Access journal publishers

• Deliver the Project final report to JISC by mid-August 2007

Background to OpenLOCKSS

• OpenLOCKSS took its lead from the US LOCKSS Humanities Project

• Opportunity to engage with UK Open Access Publishers

• 2006 OA Survey– Titles compiled from DOAJ– Each Pilot Participant was asked to vote– Could also suggest titles– Votes were used to identify titles approached– Survey was complementary to CCL’s

Key Activities

• Working with Journal Publishers– Selecting and contacting the journals– Following up with journal publishers– Liaising with publishers/answering their queries– Selecting Additional “Reserve” titles– Negotiating for agreement

• LOCKSS Development– Implementing manifest pages– Writing plug-ins

Working with Publishers

• Selecting initial titles from the OA Survey– 13 Selected [3 Declined, 4 Yes]

• Development of Publicity Materials• Website and PDF Material• Contact and Follow-up

– E-mail and Telephone

• Negotiating for Agreement– Technical and Legal Queries

• Additional “Reserve” Titles– 2 Reserve Lists [19 Additional Titles]– Much faster and more positive response

Initial Titles

No5Renaissance Forum

No5Popular Musicology Online

Declined5D-Lib Magazine

No6Peace, Conflict & Development

No6Law, Social Justice & Global Development

Considering request6International Journal of Communications Law & Policy

Yes, Manifest Page sent6Chemistry Education: Research and Practice

Yes (Provisional)8Web Journal of Current Legal Issues

Yes (Provisional)8Reviews in History

No8Journal of Information, Law & Technology

Yes (Provisional)9Ariadne

Declined13Health Statistics Quarterly

Declined14Population Trends

ParticipationVotesTitle

1st Group of Reserve Titles

Yes, Plugin completed3RLG DigiNews

Yes, Plugin available3Journal of eLiteracy (JeLit)

Yes, Manifest Page sent4Psycoloquy

Yes, Manifest Page added4Museum & Society

Yes, Manifest Page sent4Journal of Language & Literature

Yes, Manifest Page sent4Journal of Language & Learning

Yes, Manifest Page sent4Journal of Language & Linguistics

Yes (Provisional)4Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education

Yes, Manifest Page added4Information Research

Yes, Manifest Page sent4Forced Migration Review

No4Discourse Analysis Online

ParticipationVotesTitle

2nd Group of Reserve Titles

No3The Surgeon

No3Scope

Yes, Manifest Page sent2Journal of RNAi and Gene Silencing

Yes, Manifest Page sent3Journal of Molecular & Genetic Medicine

No3The Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies

No3International Journal for Mathematics Teaching & Learning

Yes, Manifest Page sent3Genomics, Society and Policy

Yes, Manifest Page sent3Epherema: Theory & Politics in Organization

ParticipationVotesTitle

Additional Titles from Libertas Academica

• Analytical Chemistry Insights

• Bioinformatics and Biology Insights

• Biomarker Insights • Cancer Informatics • Clinical Medicine:

Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Disorders

• Clinical Medicine: Cardiology

• Clinical Medicine: Oncology

• Clinical Medicine: Respiratory and Pulmonary Medicine

• Drug Target Insights • Evolutionary

Bioinformatics • Integrative Medicine

Insights • Gene Regulation and

Systems Biology • Perspectives in

Medicinal Chemistry • Translational

Oncogenomics

Key Risks

• Publisher Risks– Lack of response or agreement with OA

publishers

• Participant Risks– Insufficient participants to host the journals

• Development Risks– Plug-in development time

Lessons Learned

• Publisher Negotiations– Can be time consuming– Needs persistence– Provide key information about costs,

technology and legal issues

• Legal queries– Content re-use– Attribution and copyright

• Plug-in challenges– Diversity of platforms– Valuable learning and development

opportunities

Current Status

• Now released:– Journal for eLiterature– Museum and Society– Psycoloquy

• Coming Soon– Journal of Language and Linguistics– Journal of Language and Learning– Ephemera– Information Research– Libertas Academica Titles

Ongoing Work

• Follow-up with Publishers– Ongoing correspondence and Manifest pages

• Ongoing Release of Plug-ins– Work with the DCC and Pilot Participants

• Maintenance of Website– Updates on OpenLOCKSS Progress

• Dissemination Activities– UKSG in April 2008– Journal article

Conclusions and Outcomes

• The agreement of 19 Open Access titles to be included in the LOCKSS system.

• LOCKSS is an ideal low-cost mechanism for ensuring preservation, particularly for Open Access titles

• There are many Open Access publishers who are very interested, very keen in some cases to have their content preserved by LOCKSS

• Our experience would indicate that there would be many more who would be willing to join the LOCKSS system

Pilot Programme Achievements

• Provided participants with the skills needed to implement and run LOCKSS

• Improvements in system documentation and streamlined processes – easier for new institutions to join and participate

• Designed and implemented a robust support management mechanism which enables librarians to contribute to the ongoing direction of the LOCKSS approach– receive critical feedback to understand user

experiences, identify ideas, and implement system improvements

• Provided affordable, local support to UK HE/FE institutions using LOCKSS– low administration and management overheads

commended by many participants

Pilot Programme Achievements

• Established a UK-wide centre of expertise in digital journal archiving– ensuring that UK priorities are identified and

addressed at the national level.

• Implemented a programme of training events and workshops– forum to share their experiences and debate common

issues

• Successfully introduced and raised awareness about the key issues associated with long-term digital journal preservation– emphasis on:

• financial and accessibility benefits of building local collections

• identifying the risks associated with the licensing constraints of current access models.

Pilot Programme Achievements

• JISC's negotiation agent, Content Complete Ltd, has improved communications with publishers to make them aware of the needs of the LOCKSS library community– continuing to add more UK content of interest into

LOCKSS.

• The OpenLOCKSS initiative has successfully improved the model for the identification, negotiation, and participation of open access content– a model undertaken by libraries, for libraries.

Assessment and Evaluation

• LOCKSS Pilot Programme Evaluation– JISC evaluation of the LOCKSS Pilot

Programme, led by Evidence Base (University of Birmingham)

• Electronic Journal Comparison Study– Comparative study between electronic journal

archiving services, led by Tee Em Consulting

Continuation

• JISC has funded the pilot phase of LOCKSS in the UK until July 2008– Extension funding from April to July 2008 while

evaluation studies are ongoing– Provides libraries with clear guidance on

decision making

• Sustainability requires institutional contribution through membership fees to a UK LOCKSS alliance– during first year, begin transfer away from full

JISC/CURL funding

Why Join the Programme?

• Access newly released premium LOCKSS content

• Reader access to content when you need it

• Dedicated UK support and guidance for libraries and publishers

• Access to detailed documentation

• Influence LOCKSS development activity to meet your needs

• Participate in cutting-edge international preservation initiatives

• Improved communication channels with publishers. Over 300 publishers have currently signed on to LOCKSS and more are joining every month

• Influence strategic coordination to identify and appraise titles of interest, both for commercial and open access use

Cost of Participation

£1,086E-F

£1,727D

£2,369C

£3,850B

£5,429A

Annual Fee – first yearJISC Band

• Current draft figures:

Running Costs of the LOCKSS Programme

• Low Institutional Cost– Minimum System Administration– Non-time consuming Collection Development

• Support and development costs covered by annual fee

• Negotiation Cost– embed within JISC negotiation agents– community-based working groups

LOCKSS Lessons Learned

• Identifying value in preservation system is difficult– Investment does not result in immediate access benefits

• Ongoing central coordination is necessary – Build expertise in support of community

– New territory: librarians need support and advice

– Understanding user needs a continuous process

• Content diversity can be challenging

• Innovation depends on experimentation– Software is never perfect

• Most ideal solution available to ensure library stewardship

– User needs are constantly changing

– Diversity of solutions: a good thing

The UK Pilot as a Model Initiative

• The UK LOCKSS Programme has promoted a model whereby– title identification and negotiation skills is

undertaken in the UK• ensuring UK priorities are highlighted and

addressed

– assets are retained in the UK• at an appropriate organisational level

• Several countries in Europe and Asia are looking to the UK Programme Model– similar national initiatives to launch

Adam Rusbridge (a.rusbridge@hatii.arts.gla.ac.uk)

William J Nixon (w.nixon@lib.gla.ac.uk)

http://www.dcc.ac.uk/locksshttp://www.lib.gla.ac.uk/research/openlockss

"...let us save what remains: not by vaults and locks which fence them from the public eye and use in consigning them to the waste of time, but by such a multiplication of copies, as shall place them beyond the reach of accident”

- Thomas Jefferson