Category: Publishing

New Shared Support Membership Option from BioMed Central

BioMed Central now offers a Shared Support Membership option.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Today, BioMed Central officially announced the launch of Shared Support Membership — a new and innovative Membership package for institutions that want to provide financial support for their researchers open access publications, but at the same time manage their expenditure.

Whilst many institutes encourage their researchers to publish in open access journals, with limited publication budgets, it is often a complicated process to apportion the right amount of funds to cover Article Processing Charges (APC’s). To alleviate some of the financial burdens, Shared Support combines the best of BioMed Central’s other Membership types (Prepay and Supporter) and splits the costs of publishing with BioMed Central down the middle — the institute pays 50% and the submitting author pays the remaining 50%.

This new Membership type therefore offers a more balanced, easier way to handle the cost associated with open access publication. It also allows both parties to benefit from significant discounts of between 5-15% depending on how much funding the institute decides to pre-pay into their Membership account.

There is no joining fee for Shared Support Membership. Members can also immediately benefit from the supply of automated repository feeds using SWORD, which ensure that any articles published in BioMed Central journals will be automatically deposited into their institutional repositories.

"The Google Book Settlement as Copyright Reform"

Pamela Samuelson has self-archived "The Google Book Settlement as Copyright Reform" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

This Article explains why certain features of U.S. law, particularly copyright law, may have contributed to Google’s willingness to undertake the GBS project in the first place and later to its motivation to settle the Authors Guild lawsuit. It then demonstrates that the proposed settlement would indeed achieve a measure of copyright reform that Congress would find difficult to accomplish. Some of this reform may be in the public interest. It also considers whether the quasi-legislative nature of the GBS settlement is merely an interesting side effect of the agreement or an additional reason in favor or against approval of this settlement.

Hindawi’s Open Access Journals Get Over 2,000 Submissions per Month

Hindawi's open access journals now receive over 2,000 article submissions per month.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Hindawi is pleased to announce that its growing portfolio of open access journals have collectively received more than 2,000 monthly submissions for this first time this August, only a year and a half after having passed 1,000 monthly submissions in February 2009.

"Over the past couple of years we have seen very strong growth both from new journals that we have developed as well as from many of our more well-established journals" said Mohamed Hamdy, Hindawi's Editorial Manager. "Our five largest journals have grown to more than 700 annual submissions each, and at the same time, quite a few of the journals that we have developed within the past two years are already receiving more than 100 annual submissions."

"We are very pleased with the steady growth that we have seen in our submissions during the three and half years since we converted the last of our subscription-based journals to an open access model" said Paul Peters, Hindawi's Head of Business Development. "I believe that the success that we have seen comes from the high level of service that we provide to our authors, as well as the rigorous editorial standards of our journals. Over the past few years we have rejected about two thirds of the submissions that we receive across our journal collection, and these high standards have enabled our journals to establish strong reputations within the academic community."

Helmholtz Association Signs with SpringerOpen

The Helmholtz Association, a group of 16 German scientific-technical and biological-medical research centers, has signed an agreement with SpringerOpen to support its researchers' open access publishing efforts.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Helmholtz Association has signed up for open access membership with Springer scientific publishing. The agreement means that the research centres in the Helmholtz Association will pay the fees charged to authors for articles published in SpringerOpen and BioMed Central journals. The Helmholtz Open Access Project assisted in the proceedings.

SpringerOpen journals are peer-reviewed open access journals in new, future-focused and interdisciplinary fields. They supplement Springer’s existing portfolio and that of BioMed Central, which offers over 200 open access journals from the life sciences and biomedicine. SpringerOpen journals appear exclusively online and are published under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which enables free dissemination of copyrighted content. The license does not give Springer exclusive rights to published content.

Authors pay an open access fee for articles they publish in SpringerOpen and BioMed Central journals, and their articles immediately appear in the relevant publication at www.springerlink.com. Dr Bernhard Mittermaier, head of the Central Library at Forschungszentrum Jülich, is enthusiastic about the agreement: "We believe that the open access journals offered by Springer are a good fit for the six research fields pursued by the Helmholtz Association. We are excited to be embarking on a partnership that will open up new possibilities for developing an open access forum for the findings of our researchers. This agreement is a step towards our goal of establishing sustainable mechanisms for ensuring fair publication fees for open access journals."

Digital Videos of ALA Panel Discussion on Life after the Google Book Search Settlement

The ALA Washington Office has released digital videos of the Panel Discussion on Life after the Google Book Search Settlement at ALA Annual.

Here's an excerpt from the panel announcement:

The ALA Washington Office is hosting the ALA ad hoc Google Task Forces' breakout session titled "Panel Discussion on Life after the Google Book Search Settlement (GBS)" which will explore the possible court rulings – approval, denial or permutation there in – and how libraries would be impacted.. . .

Jonathan Band, intellectual property attorney and counsel for the ALA, will lead the discussion and pose questions to an expert group of panelists. Invited panelists include a representative from Google (Johanna Shelton-confirmed), a professor from the New York University Law School (James Grimmelmann-confirmed), a representative from the U.S. Copyright Office and a librarian from a GBS participating library.

Springer to Offer New Open Access STM Journals

Springer will offer new open access science, technology, and medicine (STM) journals.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Springer is expanding its open access offering to all disciplines. SpringerOpen will cover all disciplines within the science, technology and medicine (STM) fields and will be offered in cooperation with BioMed Central. The entire content of SpringerOpen journals—including research articles, reviews, and editorials—are fully and immediately open access, and are accessible to anyone with an internet connection. No subscription is needed.

"We are seeing an increasing interest from our authors and from funders in all areas for open access publishing options and have responded to a need in the current market," said Wim van der Stelt, EVP Business Development, Springer. "We are happy to serve our authors and editorial boards with the publishing options they want and are also pleased to supply universities, research institutions and our other patrons with the ability to use this content online freely and conveniently."

SpringerOpen journals are e-only journals. Springer is committed to delivering high-quality articles and ensuring rapid publication as with its traditional journals, from online submission systems and in-depth peer review to an efficient, author-friendly production process. The final articles are not only published in a timely manner on Springer's online information platform SpringerLink, but are also distributed to archives such as PubMed Central and to institutional repositories as requested.

SpringerOpen journals are published under the Creative Commons Attribution license, which facilitates the open distribution of copyrighted work. According to this license, Springer will not reserve any exclusive commercial rights. The journals ask the authors to pay an article-processing charge, in accordance with market standards.

ICOLC “Statement on the Global Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Consortial Licenses” Reissued

The International Coalition of Library Consortia (ICOLC) has updated and reissued its "Statement on the Global Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Consortial Licenses."

Here's an excerpt:

The ICOLC is reissuing its Statement on the Global Economic Crisis to update information providers on the state of library and library consortia budgets in 2010. The updates below reinforce the ICOLC Statement in three substantial ways.

  1. ICOLC did not overestimate the severity of cuts to library and library consortia funding levels in its original Statement. Furthermore, we believe the worst may still be before us, as US state governments suffer the loss of stimulus funds and continued weak regional economies. All parts of the world are facing negative economic repercussions from the European debt crisis. The need for pricing restraint and options remains paramount.
  2. Fifty ICOLC member groups from around the world have participated in an anonymous survey to measure 2009 to 2010 price changes from over 30 major vendors and publishers of electronic databases and journals. This survey reveals that 38% of the price changes provided price control in the form of 1% increases or less. Seven percent (7%) of the price changes provided price reductions. We wish to commend those suppliers who have worked with libraries and consortia to contain prices. However, significant room for improvement remains. Some suppliers have done a much better job of containing prices than others. We call upon the full range of suppliers to show price restraint in 2010-2011 to enable customers to sustain as many information resource licenses as possible.
  3. We take this opportunity to highlight the added potential negative impact of exclusivity on prices, as well as access. A new Principle 3 on page 3 of this document expresses the strongly held belief of ICOLC members that, over the long-term, multiple distribution channels for licensed content provide the most affordable and suitable options for access across diverse library communities.

Swiss National Library Launches eBooks on Demand, a Fee-Based Digitization-on-Demand Service

The Swiss National Library has launched eBooks on Demand.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Swiss National Library (NL) now offers a digitisation on request service for out of copy-right books. This new paid service is known as "eBooks on Demand" (EOD). The NL already lists more than 100,000 books available for digitisation, which can be provided as a PDF to customers. . . .

To date, more than 100,000 books (mainly older publications, since only they are not under copyright) are available on request in digitised form, and can be delivered to users as an e-mail attachment, or by post on a CD.

Such works are marked in the online catalogue Helveticat (www.nb.admin.ch/helveticat) with the EOD symbol, which serves as a link to the order form. Submitting a form triggers an invoice; once this is paid, the reader receives the eBook. On request, for a small supplement, a paperback may also be supplied.

"eBooks on Demand" is a project of the NL and over 20 other libraries in ten European countries (www.books2ebooks.eu).

"Interview with Sarah Pritchard: The Changing Face of Academic Presses"

Information Today has published "Interview with Sarah Pritchard: The Changing Face of Academic Presses." Pritchard is the University Librarian at Northwestern University.

Here's an excerpt:

Q: The model that many advocate for OA books is making the text freely available online but sell the print version, so that etext will drive print sales. Do you see it as a viable model for NUP [Northwestern University Press]?

A: Absolutely, I see that as a very logical model, and I would envisage us moving to that model before we move to a totally OA environment. By the way, we are currently in the process of moving one of our journals to OA, which we are very excited about . . . TriQuarterly.

"The Google Book Settlement and the TRIPS Agreement"

Daniel J. Gervais has self-archived "The Google Book Settlement and the TRIPS Agreement" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

The proposed amended settlement in the Google Book case has been the focus of numerous comments and critiques. This "perspective" reviews the compatibility of the proposed settlement with the TRIPS Agreement and relevant provisions of the Berne Convention that were incorporated into TRIPS, in particular the no-formality rule, the most-favored nation (MFN) clause, national treatment obligations, and the so-called three-step test, which constrains the ability of WTO Members to provide new exceptions and limitations to copyright rights.

Digital Video of Intellectual Property Breakfast Club Session on Google Book Settlement

BroadbandBreakfast.com has released a digital video of the Intellectual Property Breakfast Club's the Google Book Search Settlement and E-Book Licensing session on May 11, 2010.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The panelists included:

  • Jonathan Band, Counsel, Library Copyright Alliance
  • Michael Capobianco, Vice President, Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America
  • Sherwin Siy, Deputy Legal Director, Public Knowledge

Cynthia S. Arato's Analysis of the Google Books Settlement

Cynthia S. Arato, a Partner at Macht, Shapiro, Arato & Isserles, has sent an eighteen-page memo on the Google Books Settlement to the Open Book Alliance that summarizes "the objections and argument that we lodged against the proposed settlement of the 'Google Books' lawsuit on behalf of leading foreign publishing and authors' associations, foreign publishers, and foreign authors."

Here's an excerpt:

Numerous provisions of the proposed Google Books settlement would, if approved, violate the treaty obligations of the U.S. For this reason, and because of its myriad other defects, the settlement should not be approved by the court. If the settlement is approved, it may give rise to legal action against the U.S. before an international tribunal and will certainly expose the U.S. to diplomatic stress.

Digital Video of Copyright, Content and Class Action Lawsuits: A Debate on the Google Book Search Settlement Meeting

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation has released a digital video of its Copyright, Content and Class Action Lawsuits: A Debate on the Google Book Search Settlement meeting.

Participants included:

  • Daniel Castro, Senior Analyst, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
  • Allan Adler, Vice President of Government Affairs, Association of American Publishers,
  • Peter Brantley, Director of Access, Internet Archive
  • Dan Clancy, Engineering Director, Google Book Search
  • Alan Inouye, Director, Office for Information Policy, American Library Association

Peer Review in Academic Promotion and Publishing: Its Meaning, Locus, and Future

The Center for Studies in Higher Education has released Peer Review in Academic Promotion and Publishing: Its Meaning, Locus, and Future.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

As part of its Andrew W. Mellon Foundation-funded Future of Scholarly Communication Project, the Center for Studies in Higher Education (CSHE) has hosted two meetings to explore how peer review relates to scholarly communication and academic values. In preparation for an April 2010 workshop, four working papers were developed and circulated. They are presented as drafts here. . . .

The topics of the working papers are: (1) Peer Review in Academic Promotion and Publishing: Norms, Complaints, and Costs, (2) New Models of Peer Review: Repositories, Open Peer Review, and Post Publication Metrics, (3) Open Access: Green OA, Gold OA, and University Resolutions, and (4) Creating New Publishing and Peer Review Models: Scholarly Societies, Presses, Libraries, Commercial Publishers, and Other Stakeholders.

"Seeking the New Normal: Periodicals Price Survey 2010"

Kittie S. Henderson & Stephen Bosch have published "Seeking the New Normal: Periodicals Price Survey 2010" in Library Journal.

Here's an excerpt:

A number of publishers upped prices for 2010. Springer announced a five percent increase. Elsevier price increases are also in the five percent range, with the notable exception of The Lancet. The 2010 price for The Lancet jumped nine percent over 2009 levels; that increase was still smaller than in previous years. In October, the library world reeled as Nature Publishing Group (NPG) announced a 640 percent price increase (from $39.95 in 2009 to $299 in 2010) for a print subscription to Scientific American. The cost for the digital site license also rose substantially, and a number of consortia, like the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC) and the Oberlin Group, refused to renew. The announcement came only weeks after NPG bought the magazine.

U.S. Book Sales Fell 1.8% in 2009

The Association of American Publishers reports that U.S. book sales fell 1.8% in 2009.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Association of American Publishers (AAP) has today released its annual estimate of total book sales in the United States. The report, which uses data from the Bureau of the Census as well as sales data from eighty-six publishers inclusive of all major book publishing media market holders, estimates that U.S. publishers had net sales of $23.9 billion in 2009, down from $24.3 billion in 2008, representing a 1.8% decrease. In the last seven years the industry had a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 1.1%.

Trade sales of adult and juvenile books were steady at $8.1 billion in 2009, CAGR fell to 1.8 percent. Adult Hardbound books showed healthy growth of 6.9%, $2.6 billion in 2009, however paperbound books for adult fell 5.2% to $2.2 billion. Hardbound books in the children and young adult category fell 5.0% to $1.7 billion while their paperbound equivalent grew 2.2% to $1.5 billion. . . .

Mass Market paperbacks decreased 4.0% and brought the category CAGR to -2.2%. Total sales were $1.0 billion in 2009. . . .

Educational sales in the Elementary and High School (El-Hi) category, those books produced for K-12 education, fell 13.8% to $5.2 billion in 2009, and CAGR for this category was -1.4%. The Higher Education category, which includes sales of college textbooks reached $4.3 billion this year up 12.9% on 2008. This brought the CAGR for college textbooks to 5.0%.

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

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."

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

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.

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

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.

California Digital Library Becomes Founding Member of DataCite Consortium

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.

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

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.

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

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."

"The Amended Google Books Settlement is Still Exclusive"

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.