Archive for the 'Publishing' Category

American Society of Media Photographers and Others File Copyright Infringement Suit against Google

Posted in Copyright, Digital Copyright Wars, E-Books, Google and Other Search Engines, Mass Digitizaton, Publishing on April 8th, 2010

The American Society of Media Photographers, the Graphic Artists Guild, the Picture Archive Council of America, the North American Nature Photography Association, Professional Photographers of America, and others have filed a copyright infringement suit against Google in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The suit, which was filed by Mishcon de Reya New York LLP, relates to Google’s illegal scanning of millions of books and other publications containing copyrighted images and displaying them to the public without regard to the rights of the visual creators. ASMP and the other trade associations, representing thousands of members, decided to file the class action after the Court denied their request to join the currently pending $125 million class action that had previously been filed primarily on behalf of text authors in connection with the Google Library Project. The new class action goes beyond Google’s Library Project, and includes Google’s other systematic and pervasive infringements of the rights of photographers, illustrators and other visual artists.

This action by ASMP and its sister organizations was taken in order to protect the interests of owners of copyrights in visual works from the massive and organized copying and public display of their images without regard to their contributions and rights to fair compensation. According to ASMP Executive Director Eugene Mopsik, "Through this suit, we are fulfilling the missions of our organizations and standing up for the rights of photographers and other visual artists who have been excluded from the process up to now. We strongly believe that our members and those of other organizations, whose livelihoods are significantly and negatively impacted, deserve to have representation in this landmark issue." ASMP General Counsel Victor Perlman said, "We are seeking justice and fair compensation for visual artists whose work appears in the twelve million books and other publications Google has illegally scanned to date. In doing so, we are giving voice to thousands of disenfranchised creators of visual artworks whose rights we hope to enforce through this class action."

Read more about it at "Artists and Photographers Sue over Google Book Search" and "Google a 'Brazen' Content Thief, Lawsuit Claims."

Be Sociable, Share!

    "The Short-Term Influence of Free Digital Versions of Books on Print Sales"

    Posted in E-Books, Open Access, Publishing on April 5th, 2010

    John Hilton III and David Wiley have published "The Short-Term Influence of Free Digital Versions of Books on Print Sales" in the latest issue of The Journal of Electronic Publishing.

    Here's an excerpt:

    Increasingly, authors and publishers are freely distributing their books electronically to increase the visibility of their work. A vital question for those with a commercial stake in selling books is, "What happens to book sales if digital versions are given away?" We used BookScan sales data for four categories of books (a total of 41 books) for which we could identify the date when the free digital versions of the books were made available to determine whether the free version affected print sales. We analyzed the data on book sales for the eight weeks before and after the free versions were available. Three of the four categories of books had increased sales after the free books were distributed. We discuss the implications and limitations of these results.

    Be Sociable, Share!

      Houghton and Oppenheim's "The Economic Implications of Alternative Publishing Models" with 5 Responses

      Posted in Open Access, Publishing on March 29th, 2010

      Prometheus Critical Studies in Innovation has published "The Economic Implications of Alternative Publishing Models" by John W. Houghton and Charles Oppenheim along with five responses to the paper in its latest issue. Access to these papers is free.

      Here's an excerpt:

      Building on previous work, this paper looks at the costs and potential benefits of alternative models for scientific and scholarly publishing, describing the approach and methods used and summarising the findings of a study undertaken for the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) in the United Kingdom. It concludes that different publishing models can make a material difference to the costs faced and benefits realised from research communication, and it seems likely that more open access to findings from publicly funded research would have substantial net benefits.

      Be Sociable, Share!

        California Digital Library Becomes Founding Member of DataCite Consortium

        Posted in Data Curation, Open Data, and Research Data Management, Publishing on March 23rd, 2010

        The California Digital Library has become a founding member of the DataCite Consortium.

        Here's an excerpt from the press release:

        One of today's most important priorities for academic scholarship and research is providing long-term access to datasets. Data are now seen as the building blocks of scholarship and research in the sciences and humanities. Scholars and archivists recognize the potential for increasing collaboration and synthesis when data are archived, published, and shared, forging the possibility for new discoveries built upon the research of others. . . .

        DataCite offers an easy way to connect an article published in a scholarly journal with the underlying data and allows authors to take control of the management and distribution of their research. Additionally, DataCite provides the means for researchers to share and get credit for datasets; establish easier access to research data; increase acceptance of research data as legitimate, citable contributions to the scholarly record; and to support data archiving that permits results to be verified and re-purposed for future study.

        A pragmatic first step towards managing, or "curating," data is to register the existence of datasets publicly and permanently. Mirroring accepted publishing practice, DataCite's services make it easy for data producers to obtain permanent catalog records and persistent identifiers that are visible through familiar mechanisms, such as library systems, CrossRef and search engines. . . .

        Stephen P. Miller, head of the Geological Data Center, Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego says, "It is critical for research community data operations to keep in close communications with DataCite, maintaining a forum to discuss challenges and to share resources and innovative tools. For example, the ‘Rolling Deck to Repository (R2R)' project was recently launched to capture all routine underway data on U.S. oceanographic research vessels, approximately 500 expeditions per year, conducted by 18 independent operating institutions. In recent years there has been a change in the cultural patterns in the marine science and other communities. Data are being exchanged, and re-used, more than ever. Much of the re-use is accomplished without the direct involvement of the original data collector… It is now a general practice to combine data from various online resources even before you go to sea, and to submit your data to a repository for others to use after returning."

        In addition to the CDL, the DataCite consortium includes the German National Library of Science and Technology, the British Library, the Library of the ETH Zurich, the French Institute for Scientific and Technical Information, the Technical Information Center of Denmark, the Dutch TU Delft Library, Canada Institute for Scientific and Technical Information, the Australian National Data Service and Purdue University.

        Be Sociable, Share!

          "An Introduction to Competition Concerns in the Google Books Settlement"

          Posted in Copyright, Digital Copyright Wars, E-Books, Google and Other Search Engines, Mass Digitizaton, Publishing on March 22nd, 2010

          Rudolph J. R. Peritz and Marc Miller have self archived "An Introduction to Competition Concerns in the Google Books Settlement" in SSRN.

          Here's an excerpt:

          Google started its Google Books project in 2004 with the intent to create a digital library of the world’s books. There has not been such a grand plan since students of Aristotle began to gather the world’s knowledge in the Library of Alexandria some 24 centuries ago. The world’s knowledge has changed. And so has its political economy. Twenty-first century public policy questions have been interjected to delay and reshape Google’s project, questions that did not concern the royal sponsors of the ancient Library. This review takes up questions of competition policy raised in the United States, the corporate site for Google’s virtual Library of Alexandria.

          After presenting the factual background to the Google Books project and the procedural history of the current class-action lawsuit, we examine two clusters of competition issues concerning the Google Books project: First, whether a class action settlement in litigation between private parties is an appropriate vehicle for making public policy. Second, whether Google’s actions are on balance anticompetitive under U.S. antitrust laws. Antitrust concerns will be given the lion’s share of attention.

          Be Sociable, Share!

            "GBS March Madness: Paths Forward for the Google Books Settlement"

            Posted in Copyright, Digital Copyright Wars, E-Books, Google and Other Search Engines, Mass Digitizaton, Publishing on March 5th, 2010

            The American Library Association, the Association of Research Libraries, and the Association of College and Research Libraries have released "GBS March Madness: Paths Forward for the Google Books Settlement."

            Here's an excerpt from the press release:

            This diagram, developed by Jonathan Band, explores the many possible routes and outcomes of the Google Books Settlement, including avenues into the litigation and appeals process.

            Now that the fairness hearing on the Google Books Settlement has occurred, it is up to Judge Chin to decide whether the amended settlement agreement (ASA), submitted to the Court by Google, the Authors Guild, and the Association of American Publishers, is "fair, reasonable, and adequate." As the diagram shows, however, Judge Chin’s decision is only the next step in a very complex legal proceeding that could take a dozen more turns before reaching resolution. Despite the complexity of the diagram, it does not reflect every possible twist in the case, nor does it address the substantive reasons why a certain outcome may occur or the impact of Congressional intervention through legislation. As Band states, "the precise way forward is more difficult to predict than the NCAA tournament. And although the next step in the GBS saga may occur this March, many more NCAA tournaments will come and go before the buzzer sounds on this dispute."

            Be Sociable, Share!

              "The Amended Google Books Settlement is Still Exclusive"

              Posted in Copyright, Digital Copyright Wars, E-Books, Google and Other Search Engines, Mass Digitizaton, Publishing on March 3rd, 2010

              James Grimmelmann has self-archived "The Amended Google Books Settlement is Still Exclusive" in SSRN.

              Here's an excerpt:

              This brief essay argues that the proposed settlement in the Google Books case, although formally non-exclusive, would have the practical effect of giving Google an exclusive license to a large number of books. The settlement itself does not create mechanisms for Google's competitors to obtain licenses to orphan books and competitors are unlikely to be able to obtain similar settlements of their own. Recent amendments to the settlement do not change this conclusion.

              Be Sociable, Share!

                Modelling Scholarly Communication Options: Costs and Benefits for Universities

                Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Communication, Scholarly Journals on February 25th, 2010

                JISC has released Modelling Scholarly Communication Options: Costs and Benefits for Universities.

                Here's an excerpt from the announcement (announcement includes podcast):

                The key findings from the report show

                • The annual savings in research and library costs of a university repository model combined with subscription publishing could range from £100,000 to £1,320,000
                • Moving from Open Access journals and subscription-funding to per-article Open Access journal funding has the potential to achieve savings for universities between £620,000 per year and £1,700,000 per year if the article-processing charge is set at £500 or less
                • Savings from a change away from subscription-funding to per-article Open Access journal funding were estimated to be between £170,000 and £1,365,000 per year for three out of the four universities studied when the article-processing charge is £1000 per article or less
                • For the remaining university in the study a move from subscription-funding to the per-article Open Access journal funding saw the university having to pay £1.86m more in this scenario

                See also the related documents: How to Build a Case for University Policies and Practices in Support of Open Access and Publishing Research Papers Which Policy Will Deliver Best Value for Your University?.

                Be Sociable, Share!

                  Page 40 of 103« First...102030...3839404142...506070...Last »

                  DigitalKoans

                  DigitalKoans

                  Digital Scholarship

                  Copyright © 2005-2013 by Charles W. Bailey, Jr.

                  Creative Commons License

                  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.