13
12
STEP
BY STEP
INTO THE
FUTURE
Occupying the post of Director General
over the last 15 years, Dr. Elisabeth Nig-
gemann has been at the helm of the Ger-
man National Library during a period of
rapid change. What does she think were
the key milestones during this period,
what are the biggest challenges and what
is her vision for the library? An interview.
Interview
DR. TORSTEN CASIMIR //
Photos
CLAUS SETZER
Your period of ofce as director general is characterised
by digitisation and the new types of publication which
have emerged as a result – challenges which your library
must rise to meet at all times. What is the role of digital
literature in the German National Library today?
We now have a signifcant amount of digital literature, with the result
that here too the usage rate is increasing. But copyright means that
usage is only possible on site. We can provide the digital literature at
certain reading desks. This means that even registered users cannot do
what users of university libraries are accustomed to: gain access from
outside. We do not take out any licences like the university libraries do,
but we collect publications, which must be deposited with us by law.
Do you have dreams about a national licence?
That would not be realistic, given our remit. Rather, I dream that
access could actually be provided from anywhere for specifc types of
usage and user groups under very specifc technical conditions. And
why only national? I am hoping that a discussion can take place
about the basic conditions required to provide access of this sort when
the law on works that are out of print has come into force and has been
put to the test: it will soon be possible to license any printed work that
appeared in Germany before 1966 and is now out of print through the
VG Wort. We are involved in the work on technical interfaces with the
VG Wort and the Patent and Trademark Ofce, which will maintain
the register. Why shouldn‘t similar regulations apply to other groups of
media works in a few years time?
Have you learnt over the years to settle for taking very
small steps forward over a very long period?
Permanent, sustainable developments take time. In retrospect I do
sometimes wonder: why did things not move forward more quickly?
But I cannot see any alternative. Ultimately, it is a matter of part-
nership agreements that create win-win situations. Things like that
can only be achieved step by step, not in big jumps. Overall, partner-
ship – with our committees, the associations, politicians – is the most
important factor in the success of our work.
A signifcant extension of your collection mandate came
about with the internet. Do you now have enough detail
to determine what has to be collected from the expanses
of the worldwide web and what does not?
No, not yet. A law cannot regulate a collection remit in detail and
we therefore have three levels to the description of our mandate: frst-
ly, there is the law, which is formulated at a high level of abstraction;
below that there is a Legal Deposit Regulation, which is somewhat
more specifc; and on the third level come our collection guidelines,
which are derived from the statutory provisions. These collection
guidelines have grown over the decades – for printed works, sound
media, microflm etc. They have been repeatedly adapted to new de-
velopments and in this way they have become very specifc.
Are these rules already usable for digital media?
They are currently signifcantly less detailed for digital media than
for printed media. But the sophistication we require is just beginning
to emerge. At the end of last year, for example, we ran an expert
workshop on dynamic publications such as news sites, blogs, daily
newspapers on the internet, through to websites of companies and
institutions: a snapshot taken today will be very diferent from an
image taken tomorrow.
Which issues have to be clarifed here?
The intervals at which we should take snapshots, for example. Along
with media representatives, we also invited academics and bloggers to
ask them about their requirements. We wanted to know whether they
welcome their publications being collected and archived or whether it
is important to them.
Are there any bloggers who don‘t like the idea of their
publications being held in the long term?
You quickly run into questions about the private and the public
on the internet here. How do you deal with active withdrawals of
publications by bloggers, perhaps because their views have developed
after a period of time?
But that is not related to your collection guidelines ...
Tere are certainly various diferent channels for collecting things
more or less systematically. But I am not sure that we can assume
today that blogs will still be there in ten or 15 years; I think that‘s
rather unlikely. In any case, the issue of a right to delete material is
a discussion that is ongoing in Europe under the heading of “priva-
cy“. Te hurdle to communicating publicly was much larger in the
printed world than it is in the digital. We therefore have to consider
whether the criterion “what has been published in the frst place is
and remains in our collection“ can apply unconditionally to digital
publications in such a clear form. Tis is a debate for society, which
will then have an impact on our collection work and archiving
guidelines, of course.
When it comes to the question of how to deal with the in-
ternet, are you not overwhelmed by the sheer volume and
variety of what is out there?
At least since the Library of Congress got the Twitter archive, the
question has also arisen for other libraries as to whether tweets should
be collected. My approach is to continue to diferentiate between an
essentially protected private communication – comparable, for ex-
ample, with making a phone call – and a communication that is
intended for a wider public.
What will the German National Library look like in 20
years time?
The German National Library will be even more frmly a part of a
national and international network of partner institutions than pre-
viously. Its metadata, services and last but not least its large holdings
will be accessible to anyone anywhere and at any time. These holdings
will be easy to fnd, will be used under clearly defned conditions and
searches will be performed in various languages. The services will be
reliable and orientated to the needs of users.
Which projects are on the agenda for the German National
Library as far as you are concerned in the next few years?
In the immediate future, the aim is to implement the law on orphan
works and works that are out of print. We are developing a concept for
this purpose, a clear digitisation strategy for the years of publication up
to 1966, in line with what users require. We will make applications
for project funds from external funding sources. The aim is to bring a
large part of the “black hole“ that exists in the 20th century to light.
And in the medium term?
There are still some uncertainties in copyright legislation. We are re-
peatedly expressing the concerns we have, be it at EU level, in our com-
mittees, to the Minister of State for Culture or the Ministry of Justice.
Everywhere we meet with a great deal of understanding for our need
to have clarity in these areas.
Which uncertainties are particular concerns for you?
On the one hand, text and data mining for academic purposes. There
is no defnition of what is permitted and what is not. How small
must snippets be, for example, for permission to be given to show them?
What applies to us as the German National Library? We do not take
out any licences, but we have deposit copies.
What about long-term archiving?
There are also diferences of opinion between experts here. We receive
works that can only be presented and used under very specifc conditions
of a technical sort, let‘s say a PDF in a specifc version. We need the ap-
propriate software and hardware. But these technical environments are
changing all the time. We therefore have to migrate those documents to
the next environment. In the process, something happens to the document.
We do our best not to change the document in line with copyright. But
the changes are often unavoidable.
When you look back on your time with the German Nation-
al Library – what can you enter on the positive side of the
balance sheet?
Above all, the wonderful team, my colleagues at the German Nation-
al Library. Without them – but also without all of our partners in
other organisations – there would be nothing on the positive side of the
balance sheet. To be precise, the “Law regarding the German National
Library“ in 2006 brought about a signifcant change. It really extend-
ed the opportunities available to us. I also think it‘s important that
we have succeeded in planning and delivering such a beautiful and
functional annex building in Leipzig. With the integration of the
large museum, the German Museum of Books and Writing has taken
over a prominent position on Deutscher Platz and its prominence
thanks to the new “Signs – Books – Networks“ exhibition extends
far beyond Leipzig. The fact that we were simultaneously able to pro-
vide the German Music Archive, which was struggling for space at its
former location in Berlin, with outstanding working facilities and
integrate it into the Leipzig building was a particular stroke of luck.
We are also gaining a great deal of recognition internationally for our
commitment to the development of new standards in library indexing
– just think of the introduction of the DDC in the German-speaking
world and now our appointment to the steering committee for the
RDA – and we are making good progress in the feld of automatic
indexing which is a signifcant element in the collection of large quan-
tities of online publications. None of this would be possible without
the highly motivated and highly qualifed team that we have in the
German National Library.
What is your assessment of the international projects in
which you have played a signifcant part?
The most important was the development phase of Europeana. As chair
of Europeana, I have been appointed to the Comité des Sages. On this
“committee of the wise“, I have joined Maurice Lévy, the boss of Publi-
cis, and the Belgian philosopher Jacque De Decker in advising the Eu-
ropean Commissioners Neelie Kroes and Androulla Vassiliou on issues
relating to the digitisation of the cultural heritage of Europe. It has been
an intense and exciting time of pioneering European collaboration. I
am still a little proud of our report, which is quoted even today and to
which many people refer.