Feb 13, 2025 | Articles
Interlibrary Loans 1989 Style!
As FIL continues to evolve and embrace new challenges, it’s worth taking a moment to reflect on where we started. The FIL journal archive offers a fascinating record of interlending’s journey, and what better place to begin than the very first issue?
Ah, 1989—the year when Indiana Jones, James Bond and Marty McFly slugged it out at the box office and were beaten by Tim Burton’s Batman; the Berlin Wall was still standing (just about), and interlibrary lending was very much a world of printed request slips, microfiche, faxes, and waiting. Lots of waiting.
The very first Forum for Interlending Newsletter landed in June that year, full of discussions that still feel oddly familiar today. Costs, cooperation, technology, and the eternal question: how do we get things to people faster? Some things never change…
Coventry, Conferences, and Collaboration
FIL itself was just getting going, fresh from the success of “Interlend ’88” at Coventry Polytechnic. The conference had drawn together library professionals from across different sectors, and the buzz resulted in a new network for sharing ideas. By mid-1989, FIL had over 100 members, and its first newsletter was setting the tone for regular discussion.
One of the big topics? Who pays for interlending? The upcoming “Interlend ’89” conference was tackling this very issue. Libraries were wrestling with budget constraints, user expectations, and the sustainability of services. Sound familiar?
The Future Was… Automation?
Technology was another hot topic, with Lancaster University’s PICKUP system getting a mention as an early attempt at automation. The newsletter also highlighted experiments with teleordering and the potential of online catalogues—ideas that, at the time, seemed both exciting and slightly futuristic. Meanwhile, faxes were hailed as a game-changer, dramatically speeding up the request process compared to traditional postal methods. Of course, even faxing had its frustrations—blurry pages, missing transmissions, and the occasional paper jam.
Looking at then versus now, it’s striking how interlending remains a balance between speed, cost, and collaboration. In 1989, waiting weeks for a journal article was standard; today, many requests arrive digitally within minutes—but barriers like paywalls still cause delays. Budgets were tight then, and they’re still a challenge now. The optimism around new technologies in the newsletter—whether automation, teleordering, or shared databases—mirrors today’s conversations about AI and linked data. What has endured is the commitment to resource-sharing, and the belief that no library can—or should—stand alone.
Looking Back, Moving Forward
Reading that first FIL newsletter, it’s striking how much has changed—but also how much has stayed the same. The tools have evolved, the challenges have shifted, but at its core, interlending is still about libraries working together to get people the resources they need.
So, while we might smile at the thought of 1989’s cutting-edge innovations, the drive to improve access to knowledge is something we can all still relate to. And who knows? Maybe in another 35 years, people will be looking back at our “cutting-edge” systems with the same fond amusement…
You can read issue 1 of The FIL Newsletter (as it was known back then) in our journal archive.
Dec 18, 2024 | Latest News & Updates
As the year wraps up, we’d like to thank everyone in the FIL community for making 2024 such a great year. Whether you joined an event, shared your thoughts, or just followed along, your support is what keeps us going.
Looking ahead, our next event will be held online on Wednesday 12th February 2025. More details about booking will follow soon, so save the date.
We’re always keen to hear from you, so if you’d like to present at the event, why not share your insights? Whether it’s a quick lightning talk or a full presentation, we’d love to hear about your experiences. If you’re interested, send your idea to Amanda Foster.
Wishing you a peaceful and happy holiday season – we can’t wait to see what 2025 brings.
Dec 11, 2024 | Latest News & Updates
We’re excited to announce that the Forum for Interlending is now on Bluesky. You can find us at @filill.bsky.social, joining a growing community of library professionals who are using the platform to connect, exchange ideas, and support one another.
Our move to Bluesky reflects our commitment to creating a positive, innovative space for all FIL members. With its welcoming atmosphere, Bluesky is the perfect platform for fostering meaningful connections and engaging discussions. Let’s continue to build a supportive, inclusive, and forward-thinking community where we can learn, share, and grow. See you on Bluesky!
Nov 15, 2024 | Articles, Latest News & Updates
Whether you’re a seasoned pro or just getting started in interlending, your experiences, ideas, and challenges are what make our FIL community vibrant and valuable. We’re inviting members to contribute articles that highlight what’s happening on the ground in libraries like yours -this is your chance to share what you’ve learnt and spark new ideas.
Bright Idea
Why Submit an Article?
Writing for FIL isn’t just about getting published; it’s about connecting with others in the field and contributing to a community that thrives on shared knowledge. When you share your story, you help your peers find inspiration and solutions—and you might even discover new ideas yourself. It’s also a brilliant way to showcase the unique work happening in your library.
What Should You Write About?
Your article could focus on practical challenges, emerging trends, or future opportunities. Have you come up with creative solutions for tricky requests? Is data helping you refine workflows or predict demand? Perhaps your service is adapting to meet budget constraints, or you’re preparing for the future with new technology. Whatever you’ve learned, there’s someone else in the FIL community who could benefit.
We’re especially interested in hearing from libraries of all kinds—academic, public, NHS, museum, or specialist. How does interlending look in your sector? What makes your service stand out? This is a chance to showcase your work and celebrate the diversity of our interlending community.
How to Get Involved
Sharing your story strengthens the FIL community, inspires others, and highlights the vital role interlending plays in connecting people with information. If you’re ready to contribute, just contact us to start the conversation.
Your voice matters – Let’s hear it!
Nov 6, 2024 | Articles
This article draws on work carried at Leeds Beckett Library by Rachel Davies (Academic Librarian), Tom Lennox (Library Services Supervisor – Lending), and Liesl Rowe (Senior Digital Library Advisor – Copyright) and is based on a presentation given by Tom and Liesl at the International Copyright-Literacy Event with Playful Opportunities for Practitioners and Scholars (Icepops) 2024, titled “Can Open, Worms Everywhere: Copyright, Interlibrary Loans, and Systematic Reviews.”
Working in Interlibrary Loan, we often find ourselves at the intersection of research needs and copyright restrictions. Recently, our team at Leeds Beckett Library faced a challenge—handling over 150 ILL article requests from a systematic review team. This situation raised important questions about how libraries manage such complex requests within the framework of copyright law.
Spotting Systematic Reviews in the Wild
Systematic reviews are the foundation of evidence-based research, especially in disciplines like healthcare and social sciences. These reviews meticulously gather and synthesise all relevant studies on a given topic, providing an unbiased, comprehensive analysis that informs everything from clinical practices to policy decisions. Conducted by teams of academics across institutions, systematic reviews demand access to vast amounts of research material—far more than most individual libraries can provide. That’s where Interlibrary Loans come into play.
Identifying systematic review requests within ILL workflows is often a challenge. Systematic review requests don’t arrive all together, neatly labelled. Instead, these requests are commonly received in smaller batches, often submitted by multiple researchers working on the project, without clear indications they are part of a collaborative review. Many libraries may not even realise they’re handling systematic review requests, which could explain the relative silence on the issue within the ILL community.
Despite this, our colleagues at UCLan have been especially helpful in sharing their experiences. While systematic reviews are rarely discussed among ILL professionals, UCLan was quick to offer guidance and insights into how they manage these requests within their institution. Their willingness to engage with us has been invaluable, especially as we continue refining our own processes at Leeds Beckett.
Single User vs. Group Demands
Silence in the library!
At Leeds Beckett, our team has become skilled at spotting patterns and identifying systematic review requests. However, a more pressing issue remains – ensuring compliance with copyright law.
Current copyright law limits articles supplied through interlibrary loans to single-user access. This restriction poses a significant challenge for systematic reviews, which often require access for multiple users across different institutions. Although the legal responsibility for compliance rests with the requester, who must sign a copyright declaration, ILL suppliers are also responsible for taking reasonable steps to ensure adherence to these rules.
This creates a dilemma: how can we support the inherently collaborative nature of systematic reviews while respecting copyright restrictions? To navigate this, I routinely contact requestors when we identify potential systematic review requests, to confirm that they understand and agree to the single-user limitation. While most academics are willing to affirm that they do not share ILL documents, it raises the question—are they truly complying with copyright, and as ILL practitioners, is there more we should be doing to ensure compliance?
CLA Conversations
Recognising the complexity of this issue, we decided to bring our concerns to the Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA). At Leeds Beckett, our team, Rachel Davies, Liesl Rowe and myself, explained the importance of systematic reviews to our research programme. We highlighted the challenges we face in supplying articles to groups of academics, particularly when they’re spread across multiple institutions. This conversation proved pivotal, directly leading to a positive development. As a result of our discussions, the new CLA license now includes provisions for sharing articles among groups of academics working on collaborative projects, even allowing for cross-institutional sharing.
Specifically, Section 2.4 of the new CLA license permits us to “make available, or permit the making available of, Digital Copies to a Collaboration Partner, via a Secure Network… for the purposes of a current Collaborative Project only and provided that the making available of Digital Copies does not amount to a Document Supply service.” While this update represents a notable advancement for collaborative research, the document supply service clause means we are unlikely to be able to provide systematic review materials through our traditional ILL networks. We are hopeful that future license revisions might address ILLs more directly, but in the meantime, we will need to explore alternative methods to provide these materials, while adhering to copyright regulations.
Strategies for Supplying
Since purchasing systematic review articles through our Collections budget isn’t feasible due to cost, we are working with our Digitisation team to find suitable methods of acquiring systematic review documents which comply with the new CLA provisions. We are also assessing the practicalities of establishing a secure network. One option under consideration is using Microsoft Teams to create secure, moderated areas for document sharing among authorised users for the duration of a project. We will need to ensure that this method meets the CLA’s security requirements and are currently evaluating its suitability for external collaborators, such as NHS participants.
While the new license introduces much-needed flexibility, there remains work to be done in fine-tuning our approach to ensure we adhere to best practices. We are eagerly awaiting further guidance from the CLA to help us implement these changes effectively.
A Call to Action
As we move forward, we’re eager to hear from other institutions navigating the same challenges. If your library is planning to take advantage of the new provisions for systematic reviews, we’d love to learn from your experiences. By sharing strategies and solutions, we can all improve our practices and ensure we’re supporting academic research within the confines of copyright law.
