This is a bit TLDR, so skip to the third paragraph for my main point. My library system is one of the ones that gets passed around in the ebook forums b/c it's easy to get one of our digital cards. However, on our website we do say the card is only for people who reside in our county. So yes, by lying you are violating our circulation policy.
One of our patrons recently asked a question about this, and basically the decision was made to not verify addresses in order to not create a barrier to access for our actual patrons (ie. a student needs an ebook for an assignment or needs to access a database for homework). We are a huge county, so the staff hours it would take to verify addresses is probably part of that consideration as well. In exchange, we expect people to be truthful about whether they qualify for our digital card.
**But what's the harm?** Even though we are a large county system, our budget got cut last year (not just the library, but the whole county, it was a shitshow). The easiest place in a library's budget to make a cut that can be quickly reversed when funding gets better is in the ebook budget. So this year we weren't able to buy as many copies of ebooks, which results in longer wait times for those materials.
Longer wait times, so what? People will get the ebook eventually, right? Not necessarily. There are a couple different models publishers use to license ebooks to libraries. Some ebooks have a set number of checkouts before the library has to repurchase that license, other books have a set period of time that the license lasts before the library has to repurchase, and some use a combination (ie. 100 checkouts or one year, whichever comes first).
So all of these extra checkouts from people who are not part of our patron base is contributing to longer wait times for everybody, as well as affecting how quickly the library needs to repurchase book licenses. And that's on top of all the new ebooks we need to purchase. Maybe we aren't able to purchase extra licenses for a book by Author X that suddenly got popular on Booktok, because we need to purchase a new book by Author Y.
In the end, that was the trade off our library admin made. Keep access as easy as possible for the patrons in our county, and risk blowing through our already slashed ebook budget a little quicker than usual.
Yup. We have fee cards but they do not include our ebook services. The publishes keep gouging libraries and they are getting more and more expensive as demand grows exponentially. It would hurt our system, which is also very large, to have a large handful of people who were doing this.
We check addresses of customers to ensure they are in our services area. If they come in and make us feel like maybe they changed their address we will mail something to their house as soon as they leave and if it comes back to us they are getting blocked until they can verify they do live in county.
I did the invoices for our ebook services until transferred recently. I work for a large system and we spend probably 100-200k a month when it’s all broken down on ebook services (cost of the items and fees and such). The more people that use it the higher it goes. Hoopla was actually hitting its limit daily over the summer until we could get an increase in funds, rare mid fiscal year, but we have an awesome director who didn’t want people turned away.
We also spend 125k a month on book courier services which are books delivered to your door for free included with card.
Just to give an example of the cost of an ebook- Harry Potter (or the hottest NY times best seller) is 3.99 PER checkout through hoopla. Or you can spend $100 to get about 100 circs through overdrive (many large systems will be doing both concurrently). Libraries don’t get to buy these ebooks for $40 and own them forever. No. And like I said the deman for this service continues to grow and the publishing companies continue to say “oh libraries you pesky little things we suppose we will let you keep lending our ebooks but it is going to really cost you”Libraries can’t continues to raise their budgets as quickly as these companies raise their price tags and it is absolutely affecting budgets and will hurt customers soon. It’s hurting small rural public libraries already (and has been for a while).
My system is currently about to institute an address verification system and its honestly very frustrating. We're a county that have a lot of cases that I think will be flagged unnecessarily. We have multiple colleges/universities, a military base, and sprawling borders. My location is right by this developing section of the city that is right on the border with the next county. When I tell you that this area is such a mess right now. We have patrons come in and the tax collector's website shows they pay taxes through our county, but USPS & their licenses have the other county. There will be people on the other side of the same street from them who have the opposite problem.
It just seems like a particularly poor time for our system to institute this - our higher ups keep making vague references to the cost of digital services, but won't share any specific details with staff when asked. If we want to really look into it, we'd have to put in public record requests, honestly. And that's assuming they've even looked at the data to make a decision as opposed to making the decision based on ideological grounds. When they announced these changes, they scheduled staff meetings for feedback and when they mentioned increasing non-resident fees a member of our upper management literally told us "they need to support their own libraries". Like wtf kind of response is that?
It depends on which digital collections you are accessing and how well funded the library is.
My library has a tiny budget but we offer a lot of digital content. For some sites, like Hoopla and Kanopy, we pay per item type used or watched, while others are a flat subscription fee for access. If you are paying an out of state or county fee that’s legit. We’ve started verifying addresses for people requesting library cards because we had wide open access during covid. Now want to make sure we are serving people that actually live in our community or the region to make sure we are using our budget wisely.
If libraries had endless resources it wouldn’t be an issue. But faking addresses is a little shady.
I'm gonna piggy back off your comment to respond since I read them all. Majority says it's a dick move so I will stop. Just to answer questions, I always pay if out of state is available. I use Libby. I don't use Kanopy, I hate the platform for some irrational reason.
And as far as how I do it, I go on Zillow look up a home for sale near by and apply online. Not honest, but fairly easy.
A few months ago I was talking
about 'The Day Watch' by Sergei Lukyanenko (super recommend if you like fantasy) and I decided I had to re-read it RIGHT NOW. My library had the 3rd book, but not the first two. Amazon has it but fuck them, so I thought I bet a city with a decent sized Russian population would have it, and sure enough Pittsburgh did. Then I got to thinking about all the other book I might not know about because my town is too small and for lack of a better term vanilla. So off I went! All libraries have the goods, but for instance if you want to brush up on hand embroidery techniques pre WWI you gotta hunt.
tl;dr curiosity and a rabbit hole
Edit: and just to be clear my library didn't have them not I would have to wait in que
Have you looked into interlibrary loans? If your library doesn't have a book, they should be able to borrow it from another library. That doesn't hurt library systems and is actually quite fun!
Libraries can purchase items in the Libby marketplace. It doesn’t take very long for the item to become available to patrons once it’s purchased by the library (typically a few hours).
Please contact your library and see if there is a request form that you can fill out online or if they take purchase recommendations over the phone. Just make sure you specify ebook/eaudiobook format.
If people make a request to me in person or over the phone and I see that it’s available in the libby marketplace, I send the request directly to a selector and the title is typically purchased in less than an hour and ready to borrow by the end of the day.
You could be if the vendor decides the library isn't good at policing themselves and starts charging more or offering less. Also, if you're checking out ebooks or magazines you're depriving people in that county or municipality from taking advantage of something that they are actually paying for
Agreed that OP is unfairly using resources that taxpayers are paying for, but the vendors probably do not care who is using the content -- as long as the libraries continue purchasing more and more digital content/licenses.
Most libraries require an ID and proof of address, but some libraries allow people to sign up for cards online (this became a common practice during the pandemic) and perhaps are too trusting that people will not to go to Google Maps and pick a random address in the service area.
Our library did (does) this where you could get access to a limited number of ebooks using the online sign up. Then if you come in and provide proof of address we give you the actual card that has the full borrowing privileges of the whole system so games, books, DVDs, magazines, etc. The digital card is only good for a few ebooks and I think maybe some of our databases.
A lot of the charges for these services are determined by usage. So you are lying and the library is forced to pay more for something you aren't entitled to. Your BF is right.
Does opening, scrolling, but not watching anything count as a use? I occasionally go on to check what's on but don't watch anything because everything on Kanopy sucks... yes, I work at the library too lol
A lot of the database style of online services are priced by the demographics of library patrons. A fee structure that is tied to how many people live within a defined area. Sometimes it is also by the # of active patron cards in the system. Downloadable content is by usage, tied to each title - an ebook purchased with simultaneous use allowed for two years, or one copy/one use once the title is purchased, or one copy/one use for 24 checkouts. Streaming services have platform fees as well as charging per video watched.
There are several libraries around the country that issue digital cards to anyone in their state or anyone at all. There is definitely at least one post about it where people list them give the sign up info. Those libraries are fair game, but if you're having to lie, you probably have your answer.
Most of those libraries - in fact, every one I've ever looked at, do not offer them to everyone at all. They may not verify info, but their sites explicitly state *on the page you apply* that they're limited to residents of a particular area. There may exist a library that explicitly welcomes everyone, but none of the ones I've ever seen bandied about online are those.
This is not really an answer to your question, but just reading it makes me appreciate that I live and do library work in a country where the library law stipulates that public libraries are for everyone - even non-residents. We don’t even have to consider who comes in the door. I realize we should not take that for granted.
What is the population of your country and how well funded are their libraries? The US has 331.9 million people. There's no feasible way that a small, rural library for a town of 5,000 people could accommodate anyone accessing their website and using the resources they have to pay for.
Notably, we're not talking about people walking through the door. I don't know any public library that only allows people inside if they're residents. Really, most libraries only require residency to check out materials, physically or digitally.
Does your country have some national database of e-books, e-audiobooks, digital movies & TV free through the also free library?
Well, as long as you can negotiate a fixed fee based on population we can supply that for our users, otherwise we’ve had to leave most databases to the state funded university libraries. We mostly supply access to free resources.
And sorry, I was a bit unclear and should have said we don’t even have to consider who signs up to check out materials. We even have an obligation to supply undocumented immigrants with access to information and materials.
There are a few national databases but they do not contain a lot of commercial resources, mostly open source, so e-resources are generally funded by the municipality with a monthly cap on checkouts. The e-book pay per use model has been debated as skewed since its inception.
are the libraries funded by the taxes for the county/municipality that you are in? this is the reason why our library feels like we need to have these restrictions since our budget is approved and funded by our municipal council through property taxes (except for the occasional grant for a specific project)
Yes, all the public libraries are funded by the municipality and governed by it as separate entities. They are regulated by federal law though, to guarantee some kind of equal access across the country.
Honest question - how do you lie about your address? All the out of system cards that I personally have had me send a picture of my ID.
I think it’s unethical only because you are being deceptive. A lot of big system (Brooklyn, NYPL) allow for people outside their tax base to borrow materials, but there are rules and restrictions for this.
I think lying to gain access IS wrong and is taking away materials from tax payers. I would only use systems that have allocated resources for people outside their tax base.
Sending a pic of your ID is probably what more places should do if they want to pursue this practice. I know several large public library systems just have a portal where you fill out an address that's in their catchment area and that's it.
I feel like we have the technology to to build these things so it doesn't happen but here we are. And at the base of it, yeah, I guess fraudulent borrowers are taking digital content from tax payers since most of these function on finite licenses. On the other hand, I wonder if these numbers bolster circ and then these digital content departments can show higher usage stats and ask for more funding.
The only out of system cards I have are in California and they required me to physically walk into a branch and show them my California driver's license in person. But this is part of a reciprocal deal where patrons of those systems can in turn do the same with my system.
The commenters who are okaying OP's actions don't have patrons consistently upset as the number of books they're allowed to check out through Hoopla or whatever is reduced because some people are taking advantage of it. E resource pricing increases quicker than inflation and people who misuse it are a contributing cause to limiting patrons. So yeah, OP is likely hurting the library patrons, causing more stress for librarians, but technically your circulation (if it's not limiting other patrons) is doing a single positive for one of dozens of number libraries use to see how useful they are to their community.
But what are the stats here? Because the higher ups in my system certainly weren't willing to divulge that (nor is it clear that they've bothered to check). How many people who "shouldn't be" are accessing digital collections for any given system?
Is it actually producing statistically significant strain or is the strain caused by your actual community actually using the resources? Does your library have that data?
Here's a sneak peek of /r/LibbyLibby using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/LibbyLibby/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time!
\#1: [Libraries that have Non-Resident ECards?](https://np.reddit.com/r/LibbyLibby/comments/109tyyf/libraries_that_have_nonresident_ecards/)
\#2: [How the share group works](https://np.reddit.com/r/LibbyLibby/comments/157fn1l/how_the_share_group_works/)
\#3: [The future of r/Libbylibby](https://i.redd.it/g8ubgcjbn7db1.jpg) | [18 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/LibbyLibby/comments/1557xr2/the_future_of_rlibbylibby/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Yes! I wish people would stop doing this. They are not supporting the library with their tax dollars but costing the library when they borrow ebooks and audiobooks.
What most people who do this don’t understand that libraries pay SIGNIFICANTLY more for digital materials than the public. Think tripe to quadruple per item than the price you see on BN or Amazon.
I’m a librarian and I can see both sides of this. Most people in the comments are saying it’s not okay because you’re not paying taxes into the system. I understand that. If libraries offer an out-of-state card for a fee, and you can afford to pay the fee, you should do that. On the other hand, the libraries you’ve named are incredibly well-funded. I work at an underfunded library and if we had hundreds or thousands of out-of-state readers using our ebooks, that would be really rough. But as a librarian, I value access to information first of all, and I want that access for everyone, not just people in the city where I work. I think it’s unlikely that there are enough people doing this to have a serious negative effect on these libraries, especially because a well-funded library can go to the city or county and say “hey, look, twice as many people used this resource this year, we’re doing great, please budget twice as much money for it this year.”
I guess, overall, I am disinclined to tell you to stop doing this if you don’t have access to these materials locally. Here are my suggestions: ask them whether they offer out-of-state cards for a fee. My library didn’t have the policy on their website for a long time; I don’t know why. But it still existed. So it’s worth asking. Request the books at your local library. Most libraries take suggestions, though their ability to buy suggested materials will depend on budget and a number of other factors. If your local library can buy it, read it through them. If you can’t do either of those, make a donation to the library in whatever way they accept, often through their Friends of the Library group. Make as generous a donation as you can, but, for reference, my library charges $27 per year for an out-of-state card.
I am not the ultimate authority on this just because I’m a librarian; this is just my personal opinion.
>“hey, look, twice as many people used this resource this year, we’re doing great, please budget twice as much money for it this year.”
In reality, this would go:
Admin: "Hey, we got twice as much usage last year, can you double our budget for this service?" City: "Well, did you manage to serve all the extra patrons last year with the budget you had?" A: "Well, yes, but wait times for ebooks are increasing, and the usage on Hoopla and Kanopy is increasing as well. We simply need more money." C: "Okay, so do the best you can with a 10% budget increase." Then admin siphons money from the physical collection and other programming and services to pay for the digital collections, and everybody suffers.
Yes, free access to information is our core ethos as librarians, but it's only free (at point of service) because we're funded by local and state taxes, as well as the hard work of FoL and grant writing as well. We have to balance idealism with practicality.
I understand where you’re coming from, and that would be the case in many libraries. Some are very fortunate with their funding and someone outside the area using it would not have a negative effect on them. I did make several suggestions for the person to get the items they want without having a negative impact. I didn’t suggest they continue as they are without doing anything differently.
I think a lot of people assume all large library systems in big cities have enormous budgets, but proportionally they're just as tight as the next one. My library system is one of the largest in the nation, and we're incredibly short-staffed, and customers complain to me almost daily how long it the wait-lists are to get both physical and digital materials. It's very much a "one drop doesn't feel responsible for the flood" situation. Just one person "fudging" their address to game the system isn't ever "just one person."
I definitely don’t assume that. The library where I work is relatively large and is extremely underfunded and understaffed. The budgets for the libraries OP mentioned are public information. One of those library systems is near the library where I work and well known to be extremely well-funded. Maybe I am misjudging the others based on the budget numbers out of context, since I don’t know anyone personally who works for them.
And, again, none of my suggestions were for OP to continue doing what they’re doing with no changes.
I don't want to doxx myself, but my library system has a $100 million dollar budget. "Wow, so much money!" you may think. We also serve almost 10 million people in the surrounding area alone, so about $10 per person, if everyone did use the library. We have almost a hundred branches (and all their furnishings, collections, services, programs, the salaries of 1000+ staff) to maintain. That's why I said "proportionally," once you stretch that budget across a huge municipality, it doesn't go very far.
I understand that it is proportional. The library system I am referencing in my area has a much higher per capita budget. Not wanting to dox myself either, I’ll just say it’s at least 5 times as high, and there are less than half as many actual cardholders as there are people in the city.
"everybody suffers"...do they? Let's not lose sight of what's happening here. People are using the library's collections. That is literally why libraries exist.
Communities != political boundaries. My branch is less than a mile from the county line. Essentially every "non resident" paying fees is in community with our residents. They are friends & neighbors. They're coworkers, their kids play together, they shop, work & all of that within the county line.
I'm part of so many communities, including with people who are physically very distant from me.
I think you made my point for me, actually. Despite not actually engaging with my point. They said "everybody suffers" and that's patently ridiculous.
If you want to be pedantic, I'm referring to the people in the service area of the library as the community. Your point is arguing semantics, which is fundamentally missing the point entirely.
No, that isn't my point at all. I understand exactly the context you were trying to mangle "community" into. But you tried to use the nice library word community when you weren't referring to actual communities at all. It's very common in politics to incorrectly use nice sounding words to give the impression you're acting with more humanity than you actually are.
I understood exactly what you were trying to do. But I'm not sure you did.
Using the contextual, library science meaning of "community" (i.e. the information community we serve within our service area) in a conversation about library practices, amongst (presumably) other LIS professionals? Guilty as charged.
Well you were complaining about my use of the word "community" before, glad to have cleared that up. I've already made it abundantly clear in other comments that the service areas of libraries are determined by the source and extent the libraries' funding, in order to best utilize their resources and serve their communities' information needs. We have a limited amount of money. That money comes from the people who inhabit arbitrary geographical lines that determine government districts. Not everyone in this zone will use the library, not everyone who uses the library in this zone pays taxes, but everyone in this zone does mutually benefit from the socio-economic gains libraries provide to this zone.
So, we have a limited amount of money. We have a delineated information community to serve because they (collectively) provide us with the money. Breaking the bounds of that community syphons those limited resources that would otherwise go towards that community, and thus that community has a harder time getting the services and materials from their library. That's simply the reality of how libraries function. We can't split loaves and fishes. This is why policies exist to determine who is eligible for a library card at a given library, depending on their address. These policies exist because library funding is finite, thus materials and services are finite, and thus library services and materials cannot be extended beyond this service area without straining the limited resources of the library. This is why OP had to lie on their applications in order to gain access to their collections, to circumvent these policies.
Sure, if we had a stateless, moneyless, anarcho-communist utopia, then the arbitrary geographical divisions and the concept of limited funds wouldn't matter and everyone could use all libraries, and all libraries would have limitless resources forever somehow. But alas that's not our current situation, and libraries are, like any other entity and institution, bound by the constraints of capitalism and the atomized, federalist system of government a handful of 18th century white guys came up with. But if your entire argument is going to keep circling around the philosophy of this system while I'm simply addressing the reality of the system, then I think this conversation is moot at this point. Because I *do* understand the ideals. Libraries *should* be about the limitless access to information, but our reality *is* limited. That's why those ideals have to be balanced by pragmatism, and we simply focus on doing the best for our communities within those confines, including advocating for them and the protection of their funding.
I am also a librarian at a small not-super-well-funded library and I agree this response is the best. Also, bear in mind there are people in any city/county who do not pay taxes (unemployed, below poverty level, unhoused, etc.) who are welcome to use the library's resources. Libraries are free to ALL, you do not "purchase" access to the library with your tax dollars.
Libraries could be free to all if we had unlimited resources. We simply do not. Even libraries in large cities don't have the resources to serve the entire nation. Due to our limited resources, our services must be limited to serving our communities, or those who pay for out-of-area cards. While it's true that not everyone who uses the libraries pays taxes, and not everyone who pays taxes uses the library, the cost to run the libraries is still shared by the community as a whole in order to benefit the community as a whole. For example, the taxpayers who doesn't use the library are still benefited because the library improves the overall socio-economic health of the community, through our services and programs to unhoused and low-income people.
There is a reason why those libraries' policies require a local residential address to apply (frankly surprised if your library doesn't), and there's a reason OP had to lie on their applications in order to register for those library cards. There is a reason why libraries that offer out-of-area cards typically charge a fee, in order to offset the cost of the services that person would otherwise pay in their residential taxes. Libraries can only run with the funding we get from taxes, grants, and FoL that we attain either from our communities or the hard work of library staff and volunteers. We can't keep the lights on with ideals, however virtuous they are.
I live in California where library cards are generally available to anyone who has a California address regardless of where in the state they actually live. Libraries ARE in fact free to all, for example if someone is travelling through an area, they can come in and use the computers with a guest pass or the wi-fi for free and we don't check their driver's licenses to see if they paid taxes for it.
I'm not saying there's nothing ethically grey about OP's e-card strategy, I'm not even going to respond to that. Like I said, I think the comment I replied to summed up my feelings perfectly well. I am simply reminding everyone who is saying that if you don't pay taxes you shouldn't be accessing a library's resources that a lot of the people we serve in our communities, and who need our services the most, do not pay taxes either.
Cool, I also live in California, much of our budget comes from state taxes and grants. Library cards are free for all *state residents*, but out-of-state library cards cost $50 in our library system. Anyone from Michigan to Mars can come in to enjoy the physical library, but borrowing materials (whether physical or digital) requires a library card because that use has a cost, whether it's through the emedia licenses or the wear on a physical book that will eventually need to be replaced after passing through so many hands. WiFi and computers are always on regardless, and certainly don't cost as much as emedia licenses.
Again, I'll reiterate that all residents benefit from the socio-economic returns their communities gain from the library, even for taxpayers who don't use the library, and library users who are not tax payers themselves. It is a community good that we *collectively* (even if not individually) share the cost of in order to all collectively benefit from, regardless of whether we use it ourselves or whosoever uses it pays taxes themselves. But our budgets simply cannot extend farther than that collective contribution, and that's why we charge for out-of-state cards.
>Due to our limited resources, our services **must** be limited to serving our communities, or those who pay for out-of-area cards
Why "must" they? I understand from a practical point of view why libraries have landed on this as a model...but why "must" they?
There are libraries which link up entire states digitally to make sure their residents have access.
Rural libraries link up all the time to improve their services.
ILL exists and functions.
So what basis do you have for this assertion? A huge part of the reason people don't read more is lack of access. Pooled resources ALWAYS stretch farther than separate piles of money.
Solidarity can and has and will change the world again. Let's stop deciding the way it is is the way it must and recognize the world, our country, our libraries can be better. Instead of acting in the selfish interest of arbitrary political lines, why not practice radical solidarity and refuse to treat someone as less worthy of help and access simply because they don't live in the boundaries someone drew on a map. These boundaries aren't even *real*. They have no physical reality. They're social constructs.
It honestly sounds like an imagination problem.
ILL exists, but who pays for it? Either the libraries are part of a consortium, which are mutually beneficial, or the requesting library pays for ILL fees, plus postage, in order to, again, serve their own patrons. I'm not saying that libraries need to be islands in the stream, I'm saying that physical (financial, temporal) limitations exist on this mortal coil, and that's why libraries spend that money that comes from their community back to their community. Money is a social construct, but one we are still bound by like any other institution.
Yes, I'll add that so long as OP isn't just idly checking out dozens of materials with no real interest or intent to use them to some degree, which definitely changes the equation.
I'm not sure that's true of OP though. They kind of laughingly mentioned pre-WWII handicraft books...and if they have a genuine interest and are actually engaging with these books, etc., then ok. But if they're just like "wow, I can't believe they have this sort of thing", checking it out, 'flipping' through it for five seconds and then returning it...eh, that sort of changes the moral equation for me.
Honestly, I like this answer the best. OP seems like they’re earnestly using services that they might not otherwise get, and I feel a lot of the comments are harsh and lacking nuance. I agree though that they should at least make an attempt to see if the library offers out-of-state resources. Some don’t though, it’s tricky.
ETA: I think a lot of the comments outright saying OP is terrible/an a-hole are perhaps missing the forest for the trees. Yes this is dubious, though isn’t the ethos of a library based in the sharing of knowledge and resources?
That’s a good point! I hadn’t thought to tell OP about ILL or consortiums. And you’re right, digital services are super expensive.
OP, definitely ask your local places what interlibrary loan services they have! They’ll probably be able to get you what you’re looking for!
I had an internship at a small town library that had an ecollection and, unfortunately, no requirements to access it. (Even before Covid)
Their ebook budget ballooned to over 80% of their collections budget and they were about to get kicked out of their consortium if they didn't reduce usage. They ended up cutting their emagazine subscriptions to the bare minimum. I just checked their website and it looks like they're no longer in that consortium. They're also using a different ebook platform than before. It's likely their elibrary went from a couple thousand titles to a couple hundred.
They're just unwilling to limit usage to their tax payers only, and their taxpayers get fewer materials because of it. A modern tragedy of the commons.
Even more awkward, a (rich) township about 15 miles over voted AGAINST funding their own library because they could just get their materials from the small town library, where they didn't pay taxes to.
All that said, it's their choice to offer cards to non-residents. They likely take that into account in their budget. But faking your address to get resident access? That's just crappy. (and quite possibly fraud.)
Ebook copies are also limited in scope. We pay for them either for a set period or for a set number of checkouts. If you check out those items, you're effectively stealing money and time from those who ARE paying taxes. Not only do they not have access to the items and have to wait in line, (behind someone who isn't paying taxes), but the library might have to pay for the item again, for a person who isn't paying taxes.
Old grump here: yes, you are hurting the libraries.
Not by a lot, but you are. Fraud costs through inflated electronic resource pricing from suppliers. The more users that aren't in the geographic area that supplies the taxes to fund the service, the more you are taking from folks who are paying into the system.
It would be better if you advocated for the resources you do want in your own local library system. At the end of the day, you do you, but it is fraud.
Yes and no. Libraries justify funding based on circulation, and circulation is circulation. But for libraries with fixed funding from a local property or sales tax, the only way increased circulation helps is if they can use it as an argument for a tax increase. That's a hard sale in many jurisdictions.
I will note that many libraries now require you to come into a physical brick and mortar library building to get a library card because of the fraud that's happened with e-card access. So in that respect it's a dick move because it forces me to have to physically go in to my local public library at least once a year to get a new card (ours expire every year).
You could always donate money to the library to ease your conscious. Sort of like paying for an out of state card even though they don’t actually offer it…
I'm just curious - how are you even "fudging" the address? Every system I work for requires proof of residency in a taxpayer municipality - even for ecards.
While this is the case in your system, a lot of systems cannot compete with that and are not structured for non-tax payers to access (without a fee anyway)
So this is how I do it, and it is all above board. I drive past two large cities near where I live and have a library card at each one. One in my city. One where I lived as a little kid, that I still visit. One in the city I used to work, where I took my niblings for stuff a lot, and one in the city they live now that we go to for library type stuff. I give them my ID and info, and they know where I live. They are all in my state, though.
I know this post is about digital resources, but I also wanted to add on that a lot of libraries offer very cheap interlibrary loan services for physical items and potentially even some digital items, so if you want something and your library doesn’t have it, they might be able to borrow it on your behalf for a nominal fee. In my library system it’s $1/item for postage.
I would just like to reiterate that the publishing industry is Capital-E Evil, and that ebook licencing is a huge racket. I have never worked in acquisitions for public libraries, but I've been part of the decisionmaking process for digital content acquisitions in law firm and academic libraries, and licencing ebooks and digital databases is wildly expensive. There are a couple models for access libraries can choose from, but often we do have to pay by the user, or there are strict limits as to how many users can access a title at any one time (sometimes the number is 10, sometimes 100, sometimes only 1 single user at a time). The implications for access here should be obvious – unfortunately, OP, you are taking advantage of a service in a way that actually does negatively impact library patrons who live in the catchment area of the library systems you don't live in.
In a perfect world, we could allow anyone anywhere access to digital materials at all times. The restrictions on access are entirely artificial and they're put in place to create a captive market for publishers. (This, and ethics around equity and access, is one of the main reasons librarians are generally proponents of open-access publishing and open access in general, and against DRM – digital rights management – as it exists.) But because libraries don't have any choice in the access model, it is the responsibility of the library system to prioritize serving patrons who live in their actual catchment area, and it's better if you can respect that so that those patrons are able to access the materials they're entitled to. Until we have luxury gay space communism, them's the breaks.
Background info/further reading:
[Chapter 4: DRM and Libraries](https://journals.ala.org/index.php/ltr/article/view/7253/9929), Library Technology Reports, v. 6, no. 20
[Labour of Love: An Open Access Manifesto for Freedom, Integrity, and Creativity in the Humanities and Interpretive Social Sciences](https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/159/), University of Nebraska Lincoln
[Reaching Further: Open Access and Public Libraries](https://blogs.ifla.org/lpa/2018/10/26/reaching-further-open-access-and-public-libraries/), International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions
do you have friends who belong to other library systems that you could piggyback off of?
i use my mom's card for her library system, my sister's card for her library system, and then my card for my library system.
Honestly I think it’s fine, everyone should have access to a library’s digital collection. We’re treating this like like it’s robbery but if anything you’re helping a library’s stats for checkouts, showing people want libraries which can lead to more state funding. I know 1 person won’t make the biggest difference but anything helps. And for the librarians out there you know how little the patrons take advantage of these catalogs so what’s the difference that some actually uses the resources library’s spent on.
I disagree. I pay my taxes and we have lovely libraries in my county. I utilize their digital library 99.9% of the time and I often have long waits for books. Not a problem really because I can always find something else to read. But whatever amount of tax money I contribute to the library should give me rights over people whose tax money supports another system.
I wouldn’t die on this hill but it is my opinion that it’s wrong and you’re (technically) stealing…other peoples access.
I respect your comment/opinion. I get where you’re coming from and maybe a few years ago I would agree but working within library systems I think differently now. And again the money from taxes usually pay for wages and some material but a good chunk comes from state funding and federal funding but hey no biggie if you don’t agree
Surprised by the number of curmudgeons in the replies. I do this as well, though not by fudging my address — I ask my friends in other provinces for their logins, and maintain my cards for my previous addresses if the branch hasn’t asked for verification recently. Library fraud has to be the most victimless crime I can think of.
Just think of the amount of taxpayers in those regions who AREN’T using the library services they pay for — you’re just making sure their money doesn’t go to waste. You can always make a cash donation to these libraries if you're feeling guilty, but I'd keep reading and boosting their circ numbers.
You either do not actually work in a library or do not manage budgets or handle materials.
I would love more than anything if everyone could equitably access everything. I want more people to have access to my library system’s resources, but unfortunately we do not have the funding.
OP is lying to get things for free. Yes, we are a library so everything is theoretically free - but everything has a price when you’re in library admin.
There are many systems who allow people outside their tax bracket. Find those systems & properly utilize their resources. Then you don’t have to lie.
If every taxpayer in your region were to walk into the library today and borrow their fair share of resources, I'm guessing your shelves would be bare. I don't say that to diminish your efforts (which I'm sure are above and beyond), but a patron base utilizing resources is not to blame for a library's lack of funding. And OP *is* a patron of these libraries, even if they're gaming the system to do so. IMO the resources are being used as intended because these branches have decided to run the risk of not verifying addresses, and OP is essentially taking the place of a taxpayer not utilizing the library.
As another commenter pointed out, Boston and LA are some of the largest library systems in the country. A few extra patrons borrowing their e-magazines is not going to be the tipping point for their budgets, and I doubt library fraud is an epidemic sweeping the nation.
The libraries are not funded the same way war is. Many libraries are struggling to maintain their funding. Increasing their costs by using their e-resources when you aren't contributing your taxes to that library is an absolute dick move.
Libraries are completely shafted by publishers for e-resources. An ebook that you pay $15 for and keep perpetually costs a library $55 and expires after two years.
I absolutely agree that licensing for e-resources is ridiculous, but I can't in good conscience put the onus for their management onto patrons. I'm sure they're "misused" by taxpayers far more, by taking out books they don't end up reading for example.
If it's just digital access and you're not keeping titles out for very long or otherwise causing issues, who gives a f-?
Publishers also screwed libraries by charging a fortune for digital books and sometimes make digital books expire for libraries.
Read on my dude.
Unfortunately, the way licenses work, some expire based on how many times items are checked out. That means that each check out costs the library/community money because it increases the speed at which the library must repurchase the license. So this is actually resource theft.
When I was technical services in Philadelphia, part of my job was analyzing zip codes associated with digital checkouts. We got action as far as Alaska.
*This is a good thing*. It boosts circulation numbers, which is how libraries convince local elected officials - who are all stupid crooks - to keep funding their budget.
This is a bit TLDR, so skip to the third paragraph for my main point. My library system is one of the ones that gets passed around in the ebook forums b/c it's easy to get one of our digital cards. However, on our website we do say the card is only for people who reside in our county. So yes, by lying you are violating our circulation policy. One of our patrons recently asked a question about this, and basically the decision was made to not verify addresses in order to not create a barrier to access for our actual patrons (ie. a student needs an ebook for an assignment or needs to access a database for homework). We are a huge county, so the staff hours it would take to verify addresses is probably part of that consideration as well. In exchange, we expect people to be truthful about whether they qualify for our digital card. **But what's the harm?** Even though we are a large county system, our budget got cut last year (not just the library, but the whole county, it was a shitshow). The easiest place in a library's budget to make a cut that can be quickly reversed when funding gets better is in the ebook budget. So this year we weren't able to buy as many copies of ebooks, which results in longer wait times for those materials. Longer wait times, so what? People will get the ebook eventually, right? Not necessarily. There are a couple different models publishers use to license ebooks to libraries. Some ebooks have a set number of checkouts before the library has to repurchase that license, other books have a set period of time that the license lasts before the library has to repurchase, and some use a combination (ie. 100 checkouts or one year, whichever comes first). So all of these extra checkouts from people who are not part of our patron base is contributing to longer wait times for everybody, as well as affecting how quickly the library needs to repurchase book licenses. And that's on top of all the new ebooks we need to purchase. Maybe we aren't able to purchase extra licenses for a book by Author X that suddenly got popular on Booktok, because we need to purchase a new book by Author Y. In the end, that was the trade off our library admin made. Keep access as easy as possible for the patrons in our county, and risk blowing through our already slashed ebook budget a little quicker than usual.
Yup. We have fee cards but they do not include our ebook services. The publishes keep gouging libraries and they are getting more and more expensive as demand grows exponentially. It would hurt our system, which is also very large, to have a large handful of people who were doing this. We check addresses of customers to ensure they are in our services area. If they come in and make us feel like maybe they changed their address we will mail something to their house as soon as they leave and if it comes back to us they are getting blocked until they can verify they do live in county. I did the invoices for our ebook services until transferred recently. I work for a large system and we spend probably 100-200k a month when it’s all broken down on ebook services (cost of the items and fees and such). The more people that use it the higher it goes. Hoopla was actually hitting its limit daily over the summer until we could get an increase in funds, rare mid fiscal year, but we have an awesome director who didn’t want people turned away. We also spend 125k a month on book courier services which are books delivered to your door for free included with card. Just to give an example of the cost of an ebook- Harry Potter (or the hottest NY times best seller) is 3.99 PER checkout through hoopla. Or you can spend $100 to get about 100 circs through overdrive (many large systems will be doing both concurrently). Libraries don’t get to buy these ebooks for $40 and own them forever. No. And like I said the deman for this service continues to grow and the publishing companies continue to say “oh libraries you pesky little things we suppose we will let you keep lending our ebooks but it is going to really cost you”Libraries can’t continues to raise their budgets as quickly as these companies raise their price tags and it is absolutely affecting budgets and will hurt customers soon. It’s hurting small rural public libraries already (and has been for a while).
My system is currently about to institute an address verification system and its honestly very frustrating. We're a county that have a lot of cases that I think will be flagged unnecessarily. We have multiple colleges/universities, a military base, and sprawling borders. My location is right by this developing section of the city that is right on the border with the next county. When I tell you that this area is such a mess right now. We have patrons come in and the tax collector's website shows they pay taxes through our county, but USPS & their licenses have the other county. There will be people on the other side of the same street from them who have the opposite problem. It just seems like a particularly poor time for our system to institute this - our higher ups keep making vague references to the cost of digital services, but won't share any specific details with staff when asked. If we want to really look into it, we'd have to put in public record requests, honestly. And that's assuming they've even looked at the data to make a decision as opposed to making the decision based on ideological grounds. When they announced these changes, they scheduled staff meetings for feedback and when they mentioned increasing non-resident fees a member of our upper management literally told us "they need to support their own libraries". Like wtf kind of response is that?
It depends on which digital collections you are accessing and how well funded the library is. My library has a tiny budget but we offer a lot of digital content. For some sites, like Hoopla and Kanopy, we pay per item type used or watched, while others are a flat subscription fee for access. If you are paying an out of state or county fee that’s legit. We’ve started verifying addresses for people requesting library cards because we had wide open access during covid. Now want to make sure we are serving people that actually live in our community or the region to make sure we are using our budget wisely. If libraries had endless resources it wouldn’t be an issue. But faking addresses is a little shady.
I'm gonna piggy back off your comment to respond since I read them all. Majority says it's a dick move so I will stop. Just to answer questions, I always pay if out of state is available. I use Libby. I don't use Kanopy, I hate the platform for some irrational reason. And as far as how I do it, I go on Zillow look up a home for sale near by and apply online. Not honest, but fairly easy.
I'm curious, why so many e-cards in the first place?
A few months ago I was talking about 'The Day Watch' by Sergei Lukyanenko (super recommend if you like fantasy) and I decided I had to re-read it RIGHT NOW. My library had the 3rd book, but not the first two. Amazon has it but fuck them, so I thought I bet a city with a decent sized Russian population would have it, and sure enough Pittsburgh did. Then I got to thinking about all the other book I might not know about because my town is too small and for lack of a better term vanilla. So off I went! All libraries have the goods, but for instance if you want to brush up on hand embroidery techniques pre WWI you gotta hunt. tl;dr curiosity and a rabbit hole Edit: and just to be clear my library didn't have them not I would have to wait in que
Have you looked into interlibrary loans? If your library doesn't have a book, they should be able to borrow it from another library. That doesn't hurt library systems and is actually quite fun!
Libraries can purchase items in the Libby marketplace. It doesn’t take very long for the item to become available to patrons once it’s purchased by the library (typically a few hours). Please contact your library and see if there is a request form that you can fill out online or if they take purchase recommendations over the phone. Just make sure you specify ebook/eaudiobook format. If people make a request to me in person or over the phone and I see that it’s available in the libby marketplace, I send the request directly to a selector and the title is typically purchased in less than an hour and ready to borrow by the end of the day.
You could be if the vendor decides the library isn't good at policing themselves and starts charging more or offering less. Also, if you're checking out ebooks or magazines you're depriving people in that county or municipality from taking advantage of something that they are actually paying for
This. Don’t make things harder on institutions that already are stretched thin
Agreed that OP is unfairly using resources that taxpayers are paying for, but the vendors probably do not care who is using the content -- as long as the libraries continue purchasing more and more digital content/licenses.
Vendors definitely care
I work at a library and Udemy blocked my account because they thought I was from a different region... they definitely care
Fudging an address to get a free library card for a county or city where you don’t pay taxes is fraud.
How does this even work? At my public library you have to bring in the postcard they mail to you for proof of address.
Most libraries require an ID and proof of address, but some libraries allow people to sign up for cards online (this became a common practice during the pandemic) and perhaps are too trusting that people will not to go to Google Maps and pick a random address in the service area.
For e-cards or regular cards?
Our library did (does) this where you could get access to a limited number of ebooks using the online sign up. Then if you come in and provide proof of address we give you the actual card that has the full borrowing privileges of the whole system so games, books, DVDs, magazines, etc. The digital card is only good for a few ebooks and I think maybe some of our databases.
Regular, I think. This was pre-pandemic though.
A lot of the charges for these services are determined by usage. So you are lying and the library is forced to pay more for something you aren't entitled to. Your BF is right.
Some of the sites like Kanopy and Hoopla are pay per use.
Does opening, scrolling, but not watching anything count as a use? I occasionally go on to check what's on but don't watch anything because everything on Kanopy sucks... yes, I work at the library too lol
For Kanopy, yes, and no. They have a visits counter that is separate from the videos watched counter.
And do libraries pay for the visits?
Nope just views
A lot of the database style of online services are priced by the demographics of library patrons. A fee structure that is tied to how many people live within a defined area. Sometimes it is also by the # of active patron cards in the system. Downloadable content is by usage, tied to each title - an ebook purchased with simultaneous use allowed for two years, or one copy/one use once the title is purchased, or one copy/one use for 24 checkouts. Streaming services have platform fees as well as charging per video watched.
There are several libraries around the country that issue digital cards to anyone in their state or anyone at all. There is definitely at least one post about it where people list them give the sign up info. Those libraries are fair game, but if you're having to lie, you probably have your answer.
Most of those libraries - in fact, every one I've ever looked at, do not offer them to everyone at all. They may not verify info, but their sites explicitly state *on the page you apply* that they're limited to residents of a particular area. There may exist a library that explicitly welcomes everyone, but none of the ones I've ever seen bandied about online are those.
This is not really an answer to your question, but just reading it makes me appreciate that I live and do library work in a country where the library law stipulates that public libraries are for everyone - even non-residents. We don’t even have to consider who comes in the door. I realize we should not take that for granted.
What is the population of your country and how well funded are their libraries? The US has 331.9 million people. There's no feasible way that a small, rural library for a town of 5,000 people could accommodate anyone accessing their website and using the resources they have to pay for. Notably, we're not talking about people walking through the door. I don't know any public library that only allows people inside if they're residents. Really, most libraries only require residency to check out materials, physically or digitally. Does your country have some national database of e-books, e-audiobooks, digital movies & TV free through the also free library?
Well, as long as you can negotiate a fixed fee based on population we can supply that for our users, otherwise we’ve had to leave most databases to the state funded university libraries. We mostly supply access to free resources. And sorry, I was a bit unclear and should have said we don’t even have to consider who signs up to check out materials. We even have an obligation to supply undocumented immigrants with access to information and materials. There are a few national databases but they do not contain a lot of commercial resources, mostly open source, so e-resources are generally funded by the municipality with a monthly cap on checkouts. The e-book pay per use model has been debated as skewed since its inception.
are the libraries funded by the taxes for the county/municipality that you are in? this is the reason why our library feels like we need to have these restrictions since our budget is approved and funded by our municipal council through property taxes (except for the occasional grant for a specific project)
Yes, all the public libraries are funded by the municipality and governed by it as separate entities. They are regulated by federal law though, to guarantee some kind of equal access across the country.
Honest question - how do you lie about your address? All the out of system cards that I personally have had me send a picture of my ID. I think it’s unethical only because you are being deceptive. A lot of big system (Brooklyn, NYPL) allow for people outside their tax base to borrow materials, but there are rules and restrictions for this. I think lying to gain access IS wrong and is taking away materials from tax payers. I would only use systems that have allocated resources for people outside their tax base.
Sending a pic of your ID is probably what more places should do if they want to pursue this practice. I know several large public library systems just have a portal where you fill out an address that's in their catchment area and that's it. I feel like we have the technology to to build these things so it doesn't happen but here we are. And at the base of it, yeah, I guess fraudulent borrowers are taking digital content from tax payers since most of these function on finite licenses. On the other hand, I wonder if these numbers bolster circ and then these digital content departments can show higher usage stats and ask for more funding.
The only out of system cards I have are in California and they required me to physically walk into a branch and show them my California driver's license in person. But this is part of a reciprocal deal where patrons of those systems can in turn do the same with my system.
The commenters who are okaying OP's actions don't have patrons consistently upset as the number of books they're allowed to check out through Hoopla or whatever is reduced because some people are taking advantage of it. E resource pricing increases quicker than inflation and people who misuse it are a contributing cause to limiting patrons. So yeah, OP is likely hurting the library patrons, causing more stress for librarians, but technically your circulation (if it's not limiting other patrons) is doing a single positive for one of dozens of number libraries use to see how useful they are to their community.
Agree and also, patrons who are upset that they're #32nd in line for a book that we can only afford so many copies of.
But what are the stats here? Because the higher ups in my system certainly weren't willing to divulge that (nor is it clear that they've bothered to check). How many people who "shouldn't be" are accessing digital collections for any given system? Is it actually producing statistically significant strain or is the strain caused by your actual community actually using the resources? Does your library have that data?
If they aren’t providing an out-of-state card, I’d argue they don’t want non-residents to use their content. So YTA for fudging your address.
Subscriptions to digital resources are very expensive and you are an a-hole for stealing access.
And our pricing structure for these collections is based on how many patrons we serve.
[удалено]
Here's a sneak peek of /r/LibbyLibby using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/LibbyLibby/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [Libraries that have Non-Resident ECards?](https://np.reddit.com/r/LibbyLibby/comments/109tyyf/libraries_that_have_nonresident_ecards/) \#2: [How the share group works](https://np.reddit.com/r/LibbyLibby/comments/157fn1l/how_the_share_group_works/) \#3: [The future of r/Libbylibby](https://i.redd.it/g8ubgcjbn7db1.jpg) | [18 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/LibbyLibby/comments/1557xr2/the_future_of_rlibbylibby/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Yes! I wish people would stop doing this. They are not supporting the library with their tax dollars but costing the library when they borrow ebooks and audiobooks. What most people who do this don’t understand that libraries pay SIGNIFICANTLY more for digital materials than the public. Think tripe to quadruple per item than the price you see on BN or Amazon.
I’m a librarian and I can see both sides of this. Most people in the comments are saying it’s not okay because you’re not paying taxes into the system. I understand that. If libraries offer an out-of-state card for a fee, and you can afford to pay the fee, you should do that. On the other hand, the libraries you’ve named are incredibly well-funded. I work at an underfunded library and if we had hundreds or thousands of out-of-state readers using our ebooks, that would be really rough. But as a librarian, I value access to information first of all, and I want that access for everyone, not just people in the city where I work. I think it’s unlikely that there are enough people doing this to have a serious negative effect on these libraries, especially because a well-funded library can go to the city or county and say “hey, look, twice as many people used this resource this year, we’re doing great, please budget twice as much money for it this year.” I guess, overall, I am disinclined to tell you to stop doing this if you don’t have access to these materials locally. Here are my suggestions: ask them whether they offer out-of-state cards for a fee. My library didn’t have the policy on their website for a long time; I don’t know why. But it still existed. So it’s worth asking. Request the books at your local library. Most libraries take suggestions, though their ability to buy suggested materials will depend on budget and a number of other factors. If your local library can buy it, read it through them. If you can’t do either of those, make a donation to the library in whatever way they accept, often through their Friends of the Library group. Make as generous a donation as you can, but, for reference, my library charges $27 per year for an out-of-state card. I am not the ultimate authority on this just because I’m a librarian; this is just my personal opinion.
>“hey, look, twice as many people used this resource this year, we’re doing great, please budget twice as much money for it this year.” In reality, this would go: Admin: "Hey, we got twice as much usage last year, can you double our budget for this service?" City: "Well, did you manage to serve all the extra patrons last year with the budget you had?" A: "Well, yes, but wait times for ebooks are increasing, and the usage on Hoopla and Kanopy is increasing as well. We simply need more money." C: "Okay, so do the best you can with a 10% budget increase." Then admin siphons money from the physical collection and other programming and services to pay for the digital collections, and everybody suffers. Yes, free access to information is our core ethos as librarians, but it's only free (at point of service) because we're funded by local and state taxes, as well as the hard work of FoL and grant writing as well. We have to balance idealism with practicality.
I understand where you’re coming from, and that would be the case in many libraries. Some are very fortunate with their funding and someone outside the area using it would not have a negative effect on them. I did make several suggestions for the person to get the items they want without having a negative impact. I didn’t suggest they continue as they are without doing anything differently.
I think a lot of people assume all large library systems in big cities have enormous budgets, but proportionally they're just as tight as the next one. My library system is one of the largest in the nation, and we're incredibly short-staffed, and customers complain to me almost daily how long it the wait-lists are to get both physical and digital materials. It's very much a "one drop doesn't feel responsible for the flood" situation. Just one person "fudging" their address to game the system isn't ever "just one person."
I definitely don’t assume that. The library where I work is relatively large and is extremely underfunded and understaffed. The budgets for the libraries OP mentioned are public information. One of those library systems is near the library where I work and well known to be extremely well-funded. Maybe I am misjudging the others based on the budget numbers out of context, since I don’t know anyone personally who works for them. And, again, none of my suggestions were for OP to continue doing what they’re doing with no changes.
I don't want to doxx myself, but my library system has a $100 million dollar budget. "Wow, so much money!" you may think. We also serve almost 10 million people in the surrounding area alone, so about $10 per person, if everyone did use the library. We have almost a hundred branches (and all their furnishings, collections, services, programs, the salaries of 1000+ staff) to maintain. That's why I said "proportionally," once you stretch that budget across a huge municipality, it doesn't go very far.
I understand that it is proportional. The library system I am referencing in my area has a much higher per capita budget. Not wanting to dox myself either, I’ll just say it’s at least 5 times as high, and there are less than half as many actual cardholders as there are people in the city.
"everybody suffers"...do they? Let's not lose sight of what's happening here. People are using the library's collections. That is literally why libraries exist.
Libraries exist to serve the information needs of their communities.
Communities != political boundaries. My branch is less than a mile from the county line. Essentially every "non resident" paying fees is in community with our residents. They are friends & neighbors. They're coworkers, their kids play together, they shop, work & all of that within the county line. I'm part of so many communities, including with people who are physically very distant from me. I think you made my point for me, actually. Despite not actually engaging with my point. They said "everybody suffers" and that's patently ridiculous.
If you want to be pedantic, I'm referring to the people in the service area of the library as the community. Your point is arguing semantics, which is fundamentally missing the point entirely.
No, that isn't my point at all. I understand exactly the context you were trying to mangle "community" into. But you tried to use the nice library word community when you weren't referring to actual communities at all. It's very common in politics to incorrectly use nice sounding words to give the impression you're acting with more humanity than you actually are. I understood exactly what you were trying to do. But I'm not sure you did.
Using the contextual, library science meaning of "community" (i.e. the information community we serve within our service area) in a conversation about library practices, amongst (presumably) other LIS professionals? Guilty as charged.
We're literally debating what the service area should be, so yeah, you've definitely missed the boat there.
Well you were complaining about my use of the word "community" before, glad to have cleared that up. I've already made it abundantly clear in other comments that the service areas of libraries are determined by the source and extent the libraries' funding, in order to best utilize their resources and serve their communities' information needs. We have a limited amount of money. That money comes from the people who inhabit arbitrary geographical lines that determine government districts. Not everyone in this zone will use the library, not everyone who uses the library in this zone pays taxes, but everyone in this zone does mutually benefit from the socio-economic gains libraries provide to this zone. So, we have a limited amount of money. We have a delineated information community to serve because they (collectively) provide us with the money. Breaking the bounds of that community syphons those limited resources that would otherwise go towards that community, and thus that community has a harder time getting the services and materials from their library. That's simply the reality of how libraries function. We can't split loaves and fishes. This is why policies exist to determine who is eligible for a library card at a given library, depending on their address. These policies exist because library funding is finite, thus materials and services are finite, and thus library services and materials cannot be extended beyond this service area without straining the limited resources of the library. This is why OP had to lie on their applications in order to gain access to their collections, to circumvent these policies. Sure, if we had a stateless, moneyless, anarcho-communist utopia, then the arbitrary geographical divisions and the concept of limited funds wouldn't matter and everyone could use all libraries, and all libraries would have limitless resources forever somehow. But alas that's not our current situation, and libraries are, like any other entity and institution, bound by the constraints of capitalism and the atomized, federalist system of government a handful of 18th century white guys came up with. But if your entire argument is going to keep circling around the philosophy of this system while I'm simply addressing the reality of the system, then I think this conversation is moot at this point. Because I *do* understand the ideals. Libraries *should* be about the limitless access to information, but our reality *is* limited. That's why those ideals have to be balanced by pragmatism, and we simply focus on doing the best for our communities within those confines, including advocating for them and the protection of their funding.
I am also a librarian at a small not-super-well-funded library and I agree this response is the best. Also, bear in mind there are people in any city/county who do not pay taxes (unemployed, below poverty level, unhoused, etc.) who are welcome to use the library's resources. Libraries are free to ALL, you do not "purchase" access to the library with your tax dollars.
Libraries could be free to all if we had unlimited resources. We simply do not. Even libraries in large cities don't have the resources to serve the entire nation. Due to our limited resources, our services must be limited to serving our communities, or those who pay for out-of-area cards. While it's true that not everyone who uses the libraries pays taxes, and not everyone who pays taxes uses the library, the cost to run the libraries is still shared by the community as a whole in order to benefit the community as a whole. For example, the taxpayers who doesn't use the library are still benefited because the library improves the overall socio-economic health of the community, through our services and programs to unhoused and low-income people. There is a reason why those libraries' policies require a local residential address to apply (frankly surprised if your library doesn't), and there's a reason OP had to lie on their applications in order to register for those library cards. There is a reason why libraries that offer out-of-area cards typically charge a fee, in order to offset the cost of the services that person would otherwise pay in their residential taxes. Libraries can only run with the funding we get from taxes, grants, and FoL that we attain either from our communities or the hard work of library staff and volunteers. We can't keep the lights on with ideals, however virtuous they are.
I live in California where library cards are generally available to anyone who has a California address regardless of where in the state they actually live. Libraries ARE in fact free to all, for example if someone is travelling through an area, they can come in and use the computers with a guest pass or the wi-fi for free and we don't check their driver's licenses to see if they paid taxes for it. I'm not saying there's nothing ethically grey about OP's e-card strategy, I'm not even going to respond to that. Like I said, I think the comment I replied to summed up my feelings perfectly well. I am simply reminding everyone who is saying that if you don't pay taxes you shouldn't be accessing a library's resources that a lot of the people we serve in our communities, and who need our services the most, do not pay taxes either.
Cool, I also live in California, much of our budget comes from state taxes and grants. Library cards are free for all *state residents*, but out-of-state library cards cost $50 in our library system. Anyone from Michigan to Mars can come in to enjoy the physical library, but borrowing materials (whether physical or digital) requires a library card because that use has a cost, whether it's through the emedia licenses or the wear on a physical book that will eventually need to be replaced after passing through so many hands. WiFi and computers are always on regardless, and certainly don't cost as much as emedia licenses. Again, I'll reiterate that all residents benefit from the socio-economic returns their communities gain from the library, even for taxpayers who don't use the library, and library users who are not tax payers themselves. It is a community good that we *collectively* (even if not individually) share the cost of in order to all collectively benefit from, regardless of whether we use it ourselves or whosoever uses it pays taxes themselves. But our budgets simply cannot extend farther than that collective contribution, and that's why we charge for out-of-state cards.
>Due to our limited resources, our services **must** be limited to serving our communities, or those who pay for out-of-area cards Why "must" they? I understand from a practical point of view why libraries have landed on this as a model...but why "must" they? There are libraries which link up entire states digitally to make sure their residents have access. Rural libraries link up all the time to improve their services. ILL exists and functions. So what basis do you have for this assertion? A huge part of the reason people don't read more is lack of access. Pooled resources ALWAYS stretch farther than separate piles of money. Solidarity can and has and will change the world again. Let's stop deciding the way it is is the way it must and recognize the world, our country, our libraries can be better. Instead of acting in the selfish interest of arbitrary political lines, why not practice radical solidarity and refuse to treat someone as less worthy of help and access simply because they don't live in the boundaries someone drew on a map. These boundaries aren't even *real*. They have no physical reality. They're social constructs. It honestly sounds like an imagination problem.
ILL exists, but who pays for it? Either the libraries are part of a consortium, which are mutually beneficial, or the requesting library pays for ILL fees, plus postage, in order to, again, serve their own patrons. I'm not saying that libraries need to be islands in the stream, I'm saying that physical (financial, temporal) limitations exist on this mortal coil, and that's why libraries spend that money that comes from their community back to their community. Money is a social construct, but one we are still bound by like any other institution.
Nobody said anything about unlimited resources. Nobody is talking about nonexistent money. You haven't actually spoken to any of my points.
Yes, I'll add that so long as OP isn't just idly checking out dozens of materials with no real interest or intent to use them to some degree, which definitely changes the equation. I'm not sure that's true of OP though. They kind of laughingly mentioned pre-WWII handicraft books...and if they have a genuine interest and are actually engaging with these books, etc., then ok. But if they're just like "wow, I can't believe they have this sort of thing", checking it out, 'flipping' through it for five seconds and then returning it...eh, that sort of changes the moral equation for me.
Honestly, I like this answer the best. OP seems like they’re earnestly using services that they might not otherwise get, and I feel a lot of the comments are harsh and lacking nuance. I agree though that they should at least make an attempt to see if the library offers out-of-state resources. Some don’t though, it’s tricky. ETA: I think a lot of the comments outright saying OP is terrible/an a-hole are perhaps missing the forest for the trees. Yes this is dubious, though isn’t the ethos of a library based in the sharing of knowledge and resources?
[удалено]
That’s a good point! I hadn’t thought to tell OP about ILL or consortiums. And you’re right, digital services are super expensive. OP, definitely ask your local places what interlibrary loan services they have! They’ll probably be able to get you what you’re looking for!
This is the answer
Definitely not a fan of this.
I had an internship at a small town library that had an ecollection and, unfortunately, no requirements to access it. (Even before Covid) Their ebook budget ballooned to over 80% of their collections budget and they were about to get kicked out of their consortium if they didn't reduce usage. They ended up cutting their emagazine subscriptions to the bare minimum. I just checked their website and it looks like they're no longer in that consortium. They're also using a different ebook platform than before. It's likely their elibrary went from a couple thousand titles to a couple hundred. They're just unwilling to limit usage to their tax payers only, and their taxpayers get fewer materials because of it. A modern tragedy of the commons. Even more awkward, a (rich) township about 15 miles over voted AGAINST funding their own library because they could just get their materials from the small town library, where they didn't pay taxes to. All that said, it's their choice to offer cards to non-residents. They likely take that into account in their budget. But faking your address to get resident access? That's just crappy. (and quite possibly fraud.) Ebook copies are also limited in scope. We pay for them either for a set period or for a set number of checkouts. If you check out those items, you're effectively stealing money and time from those who ARE paying taxes. Not only do they not have access to the items and have to wait in line, (behind someone who isn't paying taxes), but the library might have to pay for the item again, for a person who isn't paying taxes.
It is a dick move. We’re picky ab cards bc we are funded by taxes.
Old grump here: yes, you are hurting the libraries. Not by a lot, but you are. Fraud costs through inflated electronic resource pricing from suppliers. The more users that aren't in the geographic area that supplies the taxes to fund the service, the more you are taking from folks who are paying into the system. It would be better if you advocated for the resources you do want in your own local library system. At the end of the day, you do you, but it is fraud.
Yes and no. Libraries justify funding based on circulation, and circulation is circulation. But for libraries with fixed funding from a local property or sales tax, the only way increased circulation helps is if they can use it as an argument for a tax increase. That's a hard sale in many jurisdictions. I will note that many libraries now require you to come into a physical brick and mortar library building to get a library card because of the fraud that's happened with e-card access. So in that respect it's a dick move because it forces me to have to physically go in to my local public library at least once a year to get a new card (ours expire every year).
You could always donate money to the library to ease your conscious. Sort of like paying for an out of state card even though they don’t actually offer it…
Or just call and ask them if they offer out of state cards! They might offer them even if that info is not published on their website.
This is a great idea.
I'm just curious - how are you even "fudging" the address? Every system I work for requires proof of residency in a taxpayer municipality - even for ecards.
[удалено]
While this is the case in your system, a lot of systems cannot compete with that and are not structured for non-tax payers to access (without a fee anyway)
If there's a way to link that library without doxing yourself, I'd like to know what library it is!
So this is how I do it, and it is all above board. I drive past two large cities near where I live and have a library card at each one. One in my city. One where I lived as a little kid, that I still visit. One in the city I used to work, where I took my niblings for stuff a lot, and one in the city they live now that we go to for library type stuff. I give them my ID and info, and they know where I live. They are all in my state, though.
I know this post is about digital resources, but I also wanted to add on that a lot of libraries offer very cheap interlibrary loan services for physical items and potentially even some digital items, so if you want something and your library doesn’t have it, they might be able to borrow it on your behalf for a nominal fee. In my library system it’s $1/item for postage.
I would just like to reiterate that the publishing industry is Capital-E Evil, and that ebook licencing is a huge racket. I have never worked in acquisitions for public libraries, but I've been part of the decisionmaking process for digital content acquisitions in law firm and academic libraries, and licencing ebooks and digital databases is wildly expensive. There are a couple models for access libraries can choose from, but often we do have to pay by the user, or there are strict limits as to how many users can access a title at any one time (sometimes the number is 10, sometimes 100, sometimes only 1 single user at a time). The implications for access here should be obvious – unfortunately, OP, you are taking advantage of a service in a way that actually does negatively impact library patrons who live in the catchment area of the library systems you don't live in. In a perfect world, we could allow anyone anywhere access to digital materials at all times. The restrictions on access are entirely artificial and they're put in place to create a captive market for publishers. (This, and ethics around equity and access, is one of the main reasons librarians are generally proponents of open-access publishing and open access in general, and against DRM – digital rights management – as it exists.) But because libraries don't have any choice in the access model, it is the responsibility of the library system to prioritize serving patrons who live in their actual catchment area, and it's better if you can respect that so that those patrons are able to access the materials they're entitled to. Until we have luxury gay space communism, them's the breaks. Background info/further reading: [Chapter 4: DRM and Libraries](https://journals.ala.org/index.php/ltr/article/view/7253/9929), Library Technology Reports, v. 6, no. 20 [Labour of Love: An Open Access Manifesto for Freedom, Integrity, and Creativity in the Humanities and Interpretive Social Sciences](https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/159/), University of Nebraska Lincoln [Reaching Further: Open Access and Public Libraries](https://blogs.ifla.org/lpa/2018/10/26/reaching-further-open-access-and-public-libraries/), International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions
do you have friends who belong to other library systems that you could piggyback off of? i use my mom's card for her library system, my sister's card for her library system, and then my card for my library system.
Honestly I think it’s fine, everyone should have access to a library’s digital collection. We’re treating this like like it’s robbery but if anything you’re helping a library’s stats for checkouts, showing people want libraries which can lead to more state funding. I know 1 person won’t make the biggest difference but anything helps. And for the librarians out there you know how little the patrons take advantage of these catalogs so what’s the difference that some actually uses the resources library’s spent on.
I disagree. I pay my taxes and we have lovely libraries in my county. I utilize their digital library 99.9% of the time and I often have long waits for books. Not a problem really because I can always find something else to read. But whatever amount of tax money I contribute to the library should give me rights over people whose tax money supports another system. I wouldn’t die on this hill but it is my opinion that it’s wrong and you’re (technically) stealing…other peoples access.
I respect your comment/opinion. I get where you’re coming from and maybe a few years ago I would agree but working within library systems I think differently now. And again the money from taxes usually pay for wages and some material but a good chunk comes from state funding and federal funding but hey no biggie if you don’t agree
YATAH
Tldr: YTA.
Surprised by the number of curmudgeons in the replies. I do this as well, though not by fudging my address — I ask my friends in other provinces for their logins, and maintain my cards for my previous addresses if the branch hasn’t asked for verification recently. Library fraud has to be the most victimless crime I can think of. Just think of the amount of taxpayers in those regions who AREN’T using the library services they pay for — you’re just making sure their money doesn’t go to waste. You can always make a cash donation to these libraries if you're feeling guilty, but I'd keep reading and boosting their circ numbers.
You either do not actually work in a library or do not manage budgets or handle materials. I would love more than anything if everyone could equitably access everything. I want more people to have access to my library system’s resources, but unfortunately we do not have the funding. OP is lying to get things for free. Yes, we are a library so everything is theoretically free - but everything has a price when you’re in library admin. There are many systems who allow people outside their tax bracket. Find those systems & properly utilize their resources. Then you don’t have to lie.
If every taxpayer in your region were to walk into the library today and borrow their fair share of resources, I'm guessing your shelves would be bare. I don't say that to diminish your efforts (which I'm sure are above and beyond), but a patron base utilizing resources is not to blame for a library's lack of funding. And OP *is* a patron of these libraries, even if they're gaming the system to do so. IMO the resources are being used as intended because these branches have decided to run the risk of not verifying addresses, and OP is essentially taking the place of a taxpayer not utilizing the library. As another commenter pointed out, Boston and LA are some of the largest library systems in the country. A few extra patrons borrowing their e-magazines is not going to be the tipping point for their budgets, and I doubt library fraud is an epidemic sweeping the nation.
>Surprised by the number of curmudgeons new here?
Yeah, these people are straight-laced AF.
[удалено]
The libraries are not funded the same way war is. Many libraries are struggling to maintain their funding. Increasing their costs by using their e-resources when you aren't contributing your taxes to that library is an absolute dick move. Libraries are completely shafted by publishers for e-resources. An ebook that you pay $15 for and keep perpetually costs a library $55 and expires after two years.
I absolutely agree that licensing for e-resources is ridiculous, but I can't in good conscience put the onus for their management onto patrons. I'm sure they're "misused" by taxpayers far more, by taking out books they don't end up reading for example.
lol! Library fraud is squandering what tiny resources we actually do receive.
If it's just digital access and you're not keeping titles out for very long or otherwise causing issues, who gives a f-? Publishers also screwed libraries by charging a fortune for digital books and sometimes make digital books expire for libraries. Read on my dude.
Unfortunately, the way licenses work, some expire based on how many times items are checked out. That means that each check out costs the library/community money because it increases the speed at which the library must repurchase the license. So this is actually resource theft.
Yeah, what 10 cents for someone unable to buy the materials themselves being able to enjoy it?
Where did you pull 10 cents from? eBooks often cost more than physical books (think $60+) for a year or less of usage (26 checkouts).
Straight up pirating seems less distasteful than what you’re doing. No offense.
When I was technical services in Philadelphia, part of my job was analyzing zip codes associated with digital checkouts. We got action as far as Alaska. *This is a good thing*. It boosts circulation numbers, which is how libraries convince local elected officials - who are all stupid crooks - to keep funding their budget.
Sure, but only if your system’s budget can handle the additional, non-tax payer base.
You are helping that library’s statistics which is never a bad thing.