Perma.cc solves the
problem of link rot for law schools, courts, and universities. Link rot occurs when the hyperlinks cited in
scholarly papers and court opinions no longer lead to the webpages they’re
meant to reference. Perma.cc creates a permanent, archived version of a website
and assigns a permanent URL to that version. The archived version of the cited
content will then be permanently available—even if the website modifies, moves,
or deletes the page’s originally cited content.
Perma.cc was developed
by the Harvard Library Innovation Lab, and its founding supporters included
more than sixty law-school libraries, along with the Harvard Berkman Center for
Internet and Society, the Internet Archive, the Legal Information Preservation
Alliance, and the Digital Public Library of America. Here at the University of Houston Law
Center, our law review and journals have been creating Perma links since the
summer of 2016, and all are very satisfied with the user experience and
results. Collectively, the Law Center’s Perma.cc users have preserved more than
1300 webpages in the less than year for readers to reference, even as URLs
change and content disappears.
This
month the excellent Editor in Chief of the Houston Law Review’s 54th
board, Jennifer Robichaux, came to me with a question about archived pages that
were now marked as “private” and not available for view. In particular, this
affected links from the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. Curious, I
began to check the footnotes of other law review and journal articles that had
Perma links to articles from these sites. The result was the same: many Perma
links to New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, all marked as private.
Here’s what the result image looks like:
It still contains a link to the originally captured
page, allowing for verification of the record, but not complete access unless
you are a subscriber.
How does this happen? The magic is in the page’s source file. According to Perma’s User Guide:
“Some Perma Records become private automatically upon creation, and their status cannot be changed. This applies to pages with a “noarchive” metatag or a Perma-specific exclusion in the site's robots.txt file. Each of these Perma Records is preserved in a dark archive and is accessible only to the individual account, organization and registrar responsible for the Perma Record.”
Learning this I went to the New York Times and checked the source code for an article published today. Sure enough a quick search found this: <meta name="robots" content="noarchive" />. Mystery solved.
Archival services like Perma.cc weren’t created to subvert copyright, but to preserve the record. Since the actual creating organization may still view the archived page, it remains useful for the organization’s source files. But adding the Perma link to footnotes in these situations is of little help to the reader.
Journals, law reviews, and others who publish Perma links to give readers access to online materials should be aware of this practice, and check what their Perma links display before publication and adjust citations accordingly. Librarians managing Perma accounts for their institution can assist by noting this in their communications with incoming editorial boards this spring and summer.
Great article. My initial thought is that best practice would be for each law review to have one institutional account to be used by the current staff so that all the PermaCC records are at least available on request even years down the line (rather than in some random staff editors long forgotten perma cc account). I'd have to look to see if PermaCC policy allows for that. Glad to have thought of this days before for publication and graduation ha!
ReplyDelete