1. ARL Statistics indicate a 39% increase in the mean of total staff employed at ARL libraries, based on the means of the figures for 1972–1974 (i.e., 193) and for l997–1999 (i.e., 269). Most of this growth occurred in the 1970s.
2. In testifying on behalf of publishers and other rights holders, Steven J. Metalitz emphasized the breadth and the particularity of control that rights holders might secure through encryption: “The effects of access control measures are not simply initial binary permissions or denials of access; they can also allow the management of who can have access, when, how much, and from where.” See the May 19, 2000 testimony to the Copyright Office’s Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyright Works, Docket No. RM99–7, p. 21.
3. On “shrink-wrapped” licenses see the briefing by the Association of Research Libraries, “UCITA: Summary and Implications for Libraries and Higher Education” [Online]. Available: http:// www.arl.org/info/frn/copy/ucitasum.html (accessed 29 May 2001).
4. See John Murray, Observations and Experiments on the Bad Composition of Modern Paper (London: G. and W. B. Whittaker, 1824); Permanence/Durability of the Book (Richmond, VA: W. J. Barrow Research Laboratory, Inc., 1963–1974), Vol. 1–7; and Verner W. Clapp, “The Story of Permanent Durable Book-Paper, 1115–1970,” Restaurator (suppl 3) (1972), pp. 8–35.
5. I believe we are beginning to understand that digital preservation cycles will be measured in just years, unlike the centuries-long preservation cycles achievable for paper and many other information carriers.