Library cards and morality

[SleepyBob]

Originally Posted by Uncle Robin

Why is this confusing? The question specifically asks about the morality/ethicality of using something to which one is NOT entitled. If one BUYS access from the supplier (through payment of a fee to them), obviously one is entitled, and there is no ethical or moral dilemma.

But you are not entitled as a resident/taxpayer. You are entitled in a different way.

So I can see how someone may have read the sentence as written, rather than as intended, and been uncertain which they meant. Debating whether non-resident fee-based users harm the system is also a valid discussion.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by SleepyBob

But you are not entitled as a resident/taxpayer. You are entitled in a different way.

So I can see how someone may have read the sentence as written, rather than as intended, and been uncertain which they meant. Debating whether non-resident fee-based users harm the system is also a valid discussion.

It’s been clarified over and over. I regret that I wasn’t clearer at first, although I think the focus on ethics/morality does indicate the point of the poll, bolstered by the examples I gave. I also think it would be difficult to argue that it was immoral to buy something from an entity at the price they charge. I’m saying that as someone who has posted more than once that fee cards don’t seem to be a good value for the issuer.

Anyway. I recognize the difficulty. I tried to make the question non-judgmental, but obviously any issue which explicitly mentions morality is going to be loaded. I find it interesting that so far no one’s been willing to admit in an anonymous poll that they use a card to which they’re not entitled, when over time I’ve spotted several posts where it was admitted openly. I’d like to get a sense of how prevalent the practice is. I’d also love to find out why people do it, but I realize that’s unlikely. I’m going to do a follow-on post with conjectures and perhaps people will be willing to follow suit. The critical difference between “I” and “they”.

ETA: I’ve reworded the original question. Part of the reason for the obscurity was that I ran out of characters.

[issybird]

Possible reasons why people use elibrary cards to which they’re not entitled, whether by residence or fee-paying.

• They’ve still got cards tied to a former residence, so why not? They’ll let them lapse when they expire, but in the meantime….
• Because they didn’t think it through; it seemed essentially cost-free to the issuer.
• Because they’re broke.
• Because the libraries they’re entitled to use by residence are poor and they weren’t aware of fee-paying alternatives.
• Because they can.

Anyone else?

[ownedbycats]

Originally Posted by issybird

Possible reasons why people use elibrary cards to which they’re not entitled, whether by residence or fee-paying.

• They’ve still got cards tied to a former residence, so why not? They’ll let them lapse when they expire, but in the meantime….
• Because they didn’t think it through; it seemed essentially cost-free to the issuer.
• Because they’re broke.
• Because the libraries they’re entitled to use by residence are poor and they weren’t aware of fee-paying alternatives.
• Because they can.

Anyone else?

Here's one I thought of:
- Their library bans the books they want to read.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by issybird

Possible reasons why people use elibrary cards to which they’re not entitled, whether by residence or fee-paying.

• They’ve still got cards tied to a former residence, so why not? They’ll let them lapse when they expire, but in the meantime….
• Because they didn’t think it through; it seemed essentially cost-free to the issuer.
• Because they’re broke.
• Because the libraries they’re entitled to use by residence are poor and they weren’t aware of fee-paying alternatives.
• Because they can.

Anyone else?

Because the selection of eBooks/audiobooks is poor at the libraries they are entitled to. So they do this to hopefully have a better selection of eBooks/audiobooks.

[SleepyBob]

Originally Posted by issybird

It’s been clarified over and over. I regret that I wasn’t clearer at first, although I think the focus on ethics/morality does indicate the point of the poll, bolstered by the examples I gave. I also think it would be difficult to argue that it was immoral to buy something from an entity at the price they charge.
...
ETA: I’ve reworded the original question. Part of the reason for the obscurity was that I ran out of characters.

Not a problem. But other people sounding (IMO) judgmental when others were uncertain due to the way the poll was actually written rubs the wrong way.

Anyway, carry on.

[Tarana]

I don't think it's morally ambiguous to use a library card where you used to be resident/work until it expires. If your card is still valid, it's valid and a correct use. At one time, in the 90s, I had cards for 3 different counties. Ramsey county (moved from) had a much better selection of craft books, Anoka County (moved to) had a huge collection of mystery/thrillers and Hennepin county (worked in) was the go to for Scifi or Fantasy. Of course, these days I don't need to handle all these cards - the metro area has combined their libraries electronically so you can go to any of them.

[SleepyBob]

I did much the same when I moved. My waitlist was with the old library, so I continued to use it until my waitlist was fulfilled.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Tarana

I don't think it's morally ambiguous to use a library card where you used to be resident/work until it expires. If your card is still valid, it's valid and a correct use.

I agree, that's not fraudulent unless the T&C says the card is invalid the instant you move. Which is unlikely as people have holidays, or trial periods living elsewhere.

There are situations where a subscription is geolimited for purely "political" or even illegal contractual limitations (see EU TV Sans Frontiers directives vs US Studios). There is no loss to anyone anywhere with a Polish family taking their Pay TV box to France or Ireland, or an Irish Family living in France taking their Sky Pay TV box. (UK has left EU, but much EU law still applies till they specifically revoke it). In the past the free Terrestrial UK channels where only on a card supplied to UK (inc N.I.) addresses for Satellite, but those are all now FTA on Satellite.

[SteveEisenberg]

If you are in a country where books criticizing the government are banned, there is nothing wrong with practices that would be be dodgy if I did them. I’d be surprised to hear that many librarians, in countries ranking higher for freedom to read, would object.

One allegedly dodgy practice I may engage in is using, for eBooks, an unexpired card after moving. I could make excuses, but better to just say I Never claimed I was perfect.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Quoth

I agree, that's not fraudulent unless the T&C says the card is invalid the instant you move.

It normally says you need to tell them your new address when you move. The intent is probably to be able to contact you if your paper book is overdue, rather than anything concerning eBooks, but, well, that’s the written rule.

[Catlady]

It seems dodgy and more trouble than it's worth to use a library one is not entitled to use. Which is not to say I've never considered it; a relative has access to a good library system, and I've been tempted, either to use the relative's card (which would be greedy and unnecessary) or to use the relative's address to get my own card (which would be outright fraudulent).

Cost to the library and the taxpayers haven't been part of my decision, though they should be.

[haertig]

I have library cards for nine different library districts now. I am a resident, and taxpayer, in only one of those districts. I do not pay for the other eight out-of-district cards either.

But all those eight other districts willingly issue cards to non-district-residents, they even mention on their websites that they do this if you read the entire small print of their terms of service. The one qualification is that you must live in the same state as the library district. But you don't have to live in the library district itself or pay taxes there.

I feel lucky to have this benefit. I can't believe that my state would be the only one to have something like this, so it might be worth checking to see if your state has it too.

[Amalthia]

I don't mind people using the library through various means, the libraries still gather stats on the usage and it helps funding regardless if the user has a card through questionable means. Really, it helps libraries when their collections are used, it helps justify their budget to city councils and etc...

I'm a librarian so I have some knowledge on how circ counts help libraries. Even ebook circulation helps. Plus most librarians I know just want people to use their resources! They even count items as used when the items aren't checked out but someone pulled it off the shelf and read at a table for a while.

What I have a beef with is when non taxpayers for that library issue book challenges! I feel that only the local community should have a say on the library collection development.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by haertig

I feel lucky to have this benefit. I can't believe that my state would be the only one to have something like this, so it might be worth checking to see if your state has it too.

In my state, local libraries accepting the state financial subsidy must allow outside-the-service-area Pennsylvanians “onsite services and materials under the same rules and policies applied to local residents”. Note the word onsite in the last sentence. Paper book borrowing is considered onsite, but Overdrive is not.

As noted in my last link, providing electronic resources to out of area Pennsylvanians is optional. My county, Montgomery, is the only one I know of that historically declines to provide eBook access to in-state outsiders.