Legislation for digital heritage preservation: where we are today Digital Memory, Tallinn, Anita Goldberga National Library of Latvia

The traditional functions of legal deposit equally apply to digital heritage: Preservation of the national culture heritage; Informing public about this heritage

The present legal deposit act in Latvia - the state law “On the Supply of Legal Deposit Copies of Printed and Other Publications’’ of October 16, 1997

Imperfections in this Law The experts of the European Union recommend to reduce the number of copies; The attitude to the supply of legal deposit copies is unsatisfactory; The necessity to cover the digitally born publications

Amendments to the present law are concerned with: Number of copies to be supplied; Control mechanism regulating the functioning of the law; Coverage of publications and new responsibilities of NLL; Definitions

Latvian draft in comparison with legal deposit acts of other countries does not: Contain detail listing of the kinds of publications to be delivered (the listing is supplied in Appendix); Point out exceptions and limitations; Include details and the listing of the possible various cases (considering the fast changing reality that makes the laws become out of date as fast as technologies)

Latvian draft does not include also: Delivery of radio, TV broadcasts and movies because in Latvia other institutions have permanently been in charge for their archiving; Norms on copyright, as these are covered by other laws; Points on the archiving and preservation of databases and internet portals; No criteria of harvesting are given, although the gathering of on-line publications (including those of a limited access) is pointed out as the responsibility of NLL.

Substantial distinctions in Latvian draft are the following: It envisages only the harvesting of on-line publications, not a direct delivery of them from publishers; The delivery of copies to other libraries is the responsibility of NLL, and not of publishers themselves; One copy of on-line publications is preserved in NLL only.

The foreseeable tasks of NLL (1): To develop the co-operation with publishers. After the act is adopted additional rules (of the Cabinet?) will be necessary for the collaboration with on-line publishers, as the law defines general regulations, not the specific ones. There is a separate category of publishers having already their own archives; After adoption of the law the work in separate groups is to be performed; The solutions on the optimal periodicity of harvesting and the overlap of information;

The foreseeable tasks of NLL (2): The policy of preservation; Examining the criteria of selection. The possible risk to loose the information uncovered by the law; The analyses of the harvested information; The decisions concerning metadata (acquired manually and automatically), preservation standards and unique identifiers; A better understanding of the processes of long-term preservation.

The national policy for the digital culture heritage ‘’The Guidelines for Union Information System of Memory and Culture Heritage Institutions’’. as.pdf; as.pdf Ongoing activities for the elaboration of the strategy of NLL digital library “Letonica”

Conclusion: Harvesting must not be a project with separate steps any more, it shall be a long-term program with adequate resources, regular everyday contribution and a publicly available result.