Category: Publishing

O’Reilly Launches Open Feedback Publishing System

O'Reilly has launched the Open Feedback Publishing System, which allows readers to comment on in-progress works.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Over the last few years, traditional publishing has been moving closer to the web and learning a lot of lessons from blogs and wikis, in particular. Today we're happy to announce another small step in that direction: our first manuscript (Programming Scala) is now available for public reading and feedback as part of our Open Feedback Publishing System. The idea is simple: improve in-progress books by engaging the community in a collaborative dialog with the authors out in the open. To do this, we followed the model of the Django Book, Real World Haskell, and Mercurial: The Definitive Guide (among others) and built a system to regularly publish the whole manuscript online as HTML with a comment box under every paragraph, sidebar, figure, and table.

“Enhancing the Debate on Open Access: A Joint Statement by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions and the International Publishers Association”

IFLA and the IPA have issued "Enhancing the Debate on Open Access: A Joint Statement by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions and the International Publishers Association."

Here's an excerpt:

IFLA and IPA share a common set of basic understandings and believe that the observance of the shared ground as set out below would enhance the overall debate.

  1. IFLA and IPA value the contribution to scholarly communication that publishers and libraries have made and believe that mutual respect is important to enhance the quality of the public discourse on open access.
  2. IFLA and IPA recognise that the concerns of academic authors must be at the heart of this debate—their scientific freedom, and their needs as researchers, teachers, authors, reviewers and users are paramount.
  3. IFLA and IPA acknowledge that the broadest possible access to scholarly communications is an important shared objective and that potential access to all research by all researchers, irrespective of geographical location or institutional affiliation is a shared aspiration of libraries and publishers.
  4. All assumptions surrounding open access and scholarly communications should be open to scientific scrutiny and academic debate. All stakeholders are encouraged to innovate, experiment and explore the new opportunities that technology brings.
  5. IFLA and IPA recognise that access must be sustainable, i.e. that economic long-term viability and long-term archiving are important elements of this debate.
  6. IFLA and IPA agree that the debate is most effective if it recognises the potential diversity of scholarly communication in different academic disciplines and different types of publications, e.g, research journals, review journals, monographs, text books, etc. IFLA and IPA support a debate that avoids general conclusions for all scholarly communication but gives a closer, differentiated focus on the potentially very different framework in various academic disciplines and types of publications.
  7. Equally, scholarly publishers and their specific roles and functions can vary greatly. Scholarly publishing includes publishers with a variety of commercial and non-commercial affiliations and interests, outside and within the research community.
  8. IFLA and IPA believe publishers, librarians, government and funding agencies should at this stage support innovation, experimentation and pilot schemes on access to scholarly publications. Pilot schemes should be accompanied by vigorous research and analysis that enables evaluation against measurable targets, that reflect the chief concerns of academic authors (as set out in Point 2), as the basis for an enriched, fact-oriented debate. As part of investigating the feasibility of open access, studies should also explore such matters as impact, transparency and economic models. Data should be shared openly among stakeholders or disclosed to allow open scrutiny. The results from these studies should provide better insight into the processes surrounding open access.

See also the press release.

Google and University of Michigan Sign Expanded Digitization Agreement

Google and the University of Michigan have signed an expanded digitization agreement that incorporates the terms of the Google Book Search Settlement Agreement.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Specifically, the agreement:

Expands the scope of Google and University of Michigan's partnership:
The University of Michigan continues its tradition of leadership in library digitization by being the first library to expand its partnership with Google under the terms of Google's settlement agreement with a broad class of authors and publishers. The principles underlying the new agreement are to ensure access to our collection, to provide a solid foundation for future research and study, and to provide the greatest public good for patrons of libraries around the US.

Broadens public access to University of Michigan's collections:
Once the settlement is approved by the court, readers and students throughout the US will enjoy the benefits of University of Michigan's collections, including free previews, the ability to buy access to University of Michigan's books online, and institutional subscriptions.

Supports shared services with other libraries:
The agreement empowers University of Michigan to broaden public access to its collection by using digital files of books that Google scans to strengthen and support initiatives like HathiTrust.

Provides greater digital access to University of Michigan's collections for students and faculty:
University of Michigan will get a digital copy of every book held in their collection, whether it's scanned from Michigan or at another library.

Broadens access to public domain books from University of Michigan's collection:
The University of Michigan will be able to share digital copies of public domain works Google has digitized from its collection with fellow academic institutions, libraries, and other organizations for non-commercial purposes. These provisions enable Michigan to share its digital library collection with students, scholars, and other library users around the world.

Subsidizes University of Michigan's Institutional Subscription:
If approved by the court, Google's agreement with authors and publishers allows it to make millions of digitized books available to colleges and universities via a subscription. Under our new agreement, Google will subsidize the cost of Michigan's subscription based on the number of books scanned from Michigan. In practice, this means that Google will subsidize the entire cost of Michigan's institutional subscription–so that Michigan's students and staff will be able to access and read almost every book Google has digitized from 29 libraries around the world, for free.

Expands access for students, faculty, and patrons with disabilities:
Google will make public domain works digitized from Michigan's print library collection accessible to users with print disabilities in the same ways as in-copyright books covered under the settlement agreement.

Safeguards the public's access to knowledge:
Michigan's agreement includes collective terms Google has committed to that can be enjoyed by any of Google's other partner libraries. Michigan is the first university to sign on to these terms, which give libraries new ways to help safeguard the public's access to these books.

Establishes a mechanism to review prices:
Our agreement gives Michigan and other participating libraries the power to review the pricing of Institutional Subscriptions to make sure that they are priced for "broad penetration," as required by the settlement agreement. That means that the reviewer will evaluate whether subscriptions are affordable enough to allow universities, libraries, and other institutions across the country to take advantage of them.

If they determine that prices are too high, University of Michigan and other participating libraries who sign these collective terms can challenge the prices through arbitration, and Google will be required to work with the Registry to adjust the pricing accordingly.

Ensures access to millions of books for generations to come:
Google has committed to make the books it has scanned publicly available for free search, consumer purchase, institutional subscriptions, and other services established by the settlement agreement. Our agreement ensures that libraries and their patrons can continue to use digital copies of the millions of books Google has scanned well into the future, even if Google goes away.

Also see the press release.

Print-on-Demand/Short Run Book Titles Increase 132% in 2008, Exceeding Traditional Book Titles for First Time

Bowker reports that print-on-demand and short-run book titles grew 132% in 2008, and, for the first time, they exceeded traditional book titles.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Based on preliminary figures from U.S. publishers, Bowker is projecting that U.S. title output in 2008 decreased by 3.2%, with 275,232 new titles and editions, down from the 284,370 that were published in 2007.

Despite this decline in traditional book publishing, there was another extraordinary year of growth in the reported number of "On Demand" and short-run books produced in 2008. Bowker projects that 285,394 On Demand books were produced last year, a staggering 132% increase over last year’s final total of 123,276 titles. This is the second consecutive year of triple-digit growth in the On Demand segment, which in 2008 was 462% above levels seen as recently as 2006.

"Our statistics for 2008 benchmark an historic development in the U.S. book publishing industry as we crossed a point last year in which On Demand and short-run books exceeded the number of traditional books entering the marketplace," said Kelly Gallagher, vice president of publisher services for New Providence, N.J.-based Bowker. "It remains to be seen how this trend will unfold in the coming years before we know if we just experienced a watershed year in the book publishing industry, fueled by the changing dynamics of the marketplace and the proliferation of sophisticated publishing technologies, or an anomaly that caused the major industry trade publishers to retrench."

Scribd Store Launched

Scribd has launched the Scribd Store.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Scribd Store (www.scribd.com/store) expands Scribd's library of free original documents to include for-purchase works, many of which are new, exclusive or hard-to-find anywhere else on the Internet. In a radical departure from industry norms, the Scribd Store offers a generous revenue sharing agreement that gives sellers 80% of revenue. Prices are set by the seller and currently range from $1 for a graphic novel panel to $5,000 for an in-depth China market research report. Sellers can also choose Scribd's automated pricing option, which generates an optimal price tag based on a cost-sales analysis of similar items in the Scribd Store. . . .

The company will soon launch an iPhone application to give readers and buyers access to documents across multiple platforms; the mobile-optimized version of Scribd.com is already very popular. At launch, the beta version of Scribd Store will be open to buyers and sellers in the United States, with international launches to follow. . . .

With Scribd Store's flexible pricing, publishers have complete control over price and packaging. Sellers can specify selling whole documents, a chapter or an exact selection of pages, or in installments. They can also choose whether to serialize their books for $1.00/chapter; now, instead of having to purchase a country guide travelers can buy a standalone city chapter from Lonely Planet. Documents can be read on Scribd.com, downloaded to a PC, printed, or made accessible through web-enabled mobile phones. . . .

Sellers on Scribd Store must own the digital rights to the works they wish to sell and provide detailed information about their ownership of those works in order to sell their works through Scribd Store. Sellers can also easily manage their digital rights—choosing viewing/reading options such as "View on Scribd only," "Download PDF," "Download PDF with DRM" or "Download ePub with DRM." Sellers have the flexibility to make real-time changes to pricing and preview options for their works at any time.

Read more about it at "Scribd Launches Online Book Market," "Scribd Store a Welcome Addition to Ebook Market (and 650 O'Reilly Titles Included)," and "Site Lets Writers Sell Digital Copies ."

University of Pittsburgh Press Makes 500 Titles Open Access and Print-on-Demand

The University of Pittsburgh Press has made 500 out-of-print titles open access with a future fee-based print-on-demand option.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The University of Pittsburgh Press, in collaboration with the University of Pittsburgh Library System and the Chicago Digital Distribution Center (CDDC), is making nearly 500 out-of-print Press titles available again for scholars and students around the world.

Representing the full range of scholarly series and subject areas published by the Press, these titles are now part of the University of Pittsburgh Press Digital Editions collection, fully searchable and freely accessible to anyone with an internet connection through the University of Pittsburgh Library System's D-Scribe Digital Publishing Program. Over the next year, they will also be made available for purchase in reasonably priced paperback editions through the CDDC. Readers and researchers may read and search the full texts online, and those who wish to have a print copy may purchase it through retail outlets or directly from the Press.

Proposed Budget Cuts Threaten LSU Press

The Louisiana State University Press is listed in "Louisiana State University System: Preliminary Budget Reduction Proposals" under a $4,100,000 "Cut general fund support to academic support units" item, which says:

This cut will require certain academic support entities to implement new fees for their services or to increase their existing fees to students, faculty, staff, and/or the general public. Because of the nature of some of these entities and their fixed cost of operation, it is very possible they cannot generate the revenue needed and will close. Examples of units that may be impacted as a result of this type of decision are the LSU Museum of Art, Rural Life Museum, Hilltop Arboretum, LSU Press, Southern Review, Louisiana Library Network, Alumni Association and the Fire & Emergency Training Institute.

Read more about it at "Louisiana State U. Press Might Get the Ax."

DigitalKoans

Wolters Kluwer 2009 First-Quarter Update

Wolters Kluwer released its "Wolters Kluwer 2009 First-Quarter Scheduled Trading Update."

Here's an excerpt:

The company continues to see resilience in its first-quarter profitability despite challenging economic conditions in North America and Europe which have impacted the buying decisions of our professional customers. Regardless of these challenges, the professionals we serve continued to demand new and innovative solutions to improve their productivity. We continued to address these needs and as a result revenues from online and software solutions exceeded 50% of total revenues in the quarter. Retention rates on subscription products were largely in line with the prior year, while new subscription sales and sales on transactional products were weak as anticipated at the beginning of the year and from delayed customer purchase decisions. Despite these conditions, the ordinary EBITA margin [Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization margin] in the first quarter was in line with the prior year due to earlier cost containment actions, the continued migration of revenues from print to electronic products, the benefits of the Springboard operational excellence program and the contribution of higher margin acquisitions completed in the prior year. First-quarter cash flow was in line with expectations, and integration of prior year acquisitions is on track. The resilient portfolio and strong cash generation continue to support a solid financial position.

DigitalKoans

Digital Videos from Columbia’s Scholarly Communication Program’s Research without Borders 2008-2009 Program

A complete set of digital videos from Columbia University's Scholarly Communication Program's "Research without Borders" 2008-2009 program is now available.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The inaugural year of Research without Borders featured speakers at the forefront of the open access movement as well as experts in scholarly publishing, information policy, and copyright law. Harvard Professor Stuart Shieber kicked off the series in the fall semester, tracing the development of Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences' Open Access Policy. The second panel, with Marian Hollingsworth from Thomson Reuters, Jevin West of Eigenfactor.org, and Johan Bollen of the MESUR project, debated the controversial Impact Factor, a metric of scholarly journals' prominence. Helen Tartar and Sanford Thatcher, leaders of Fordham and Penn State University Presses, respectively, joined Columbia Libraries' Ree DeDonato for the third event, which focused on the future of scholarly monographs.

The spring semester opened with a discussion on the benefits of open science with Bora Zivkovic of the Public Library of Science, Jean-Claude Bradley of Drexel University, and Barry Canton of OpenWetWare and Ginkgo BioWorks. In March, UCLA's Christine Borgman, author of Scholarship in the Digital Age (2007), spoke to a packed room on information infrastructure and policy. The final event explored the implications of copyright trends for research, featuring SPARC's Heather Joseph, Michael Carroll of Washington Law School at American University, and Kenneth Crews of the Columbia University Copyright Advisory Office.

The Research Without Borders series will continue in the 2009-10 academic year with six new events on topics including scholarly blogging, open data, and open-access business models. Stay connected to the Program by following ScholarlyComm at http://twitter.com/ScholarlyComm, by joining the Scholarly Communication Program Facebook group, and through the iTunesU page. For more information on the Program and the series, please email Kathryn Pope at kp2002@columbia.edu, or visit http://scholcomm.columbia.edu.

DigitalKoans

African Journals Online Migrates to Open Journal Systems Platform

African Journals Online has migrated all of its journals to Open Journal Systems.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

At 346 journals from 26 countries, AJOL is the world’s largest online collection of African journals, but until now, has included only tables of content, abstracts, and journal information on the website. As of the beginning of May, 60% of the 40,000 plus articles on AJOL will be available for immediate download. By the end of 2009, AJOL aims to have 100% of its growing collection fully full-text online.

The updated site and the new functionality are possible due to a close collaboration between AJOL and the Public Knowledge Project (PKP), developers of Open Journal Systems (OJS)—the open source software which powers the AJOL service. AJOL is also supported by its donor partners, INASP and the Ford Foundation.

AJOL receives an average of 60,000 visits per month, 30% of which are from the African continent and over 15% from other parts of the developing world. The global researcher community and the authors and institutions whose work is published in the portal benefit from this increased access and visibility of African knowledge provided by AJOL. The new portal helps AJOL achieve its greater goal of shifting global flows of scholarly information, so that the importance of research published from the global south is more equitably represented.

AJOL allows for both Subscription-based and Open Access journals to be hosted for free on the site, with article downloads to toll journals being processed by AJOL and income sent on to the originating journals, less AJOL cost-recovery. In the future, AJOL will begin providing access to journal management functions of OJS to its partner Open Access journals, as a way to improve editorial quality and lower production costs.

DigitalKoans

ACRL, ALA, and ARL File Comments about Google Book Search Settlement

The American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, and the Association of Research Libraries have filed comments with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York regarding the Google Book Search Copyright Class Action Settlement.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Representing over 139,000 libraries and 350,000 librarians, the associations filed the brief as members of the plaintiff class because they are both authors and publishers of books. The associations asserted that although the settlement has the potential to provide public access to millions of books, many of the features of the settlement, including the absence of competition for the new services, could compromise fundamental library values including equity of access to information, patron privacy, and intellectual freedom. The court can mitigate these possible negative effects by regulating the conduct of Google and the Book Rights Registry the settlement establishes.

"While this settlement agreement could provide unprecedented access to a digital library of millions of books, we are concerned that the cost of an institutional subscription may skyrocket, as academic journal subscriptions have over the past two decades," Erika Linke, President of ACRL, said. . . .

Jim Rettig, President of ALA, said the proposed settlement "offers no assurances that the privacy of what the public accessed will be protected, which is in stark contrast to the long-standing patron privacy rights libraries champion on behalf of the public."

DigitalKoans

Justice Department Launches Antitrust Investigation into Google Book Search Settlement

The Justice Department has launched an antitrust investigation into the Google Book Search Copyright Class Action Settlement.

Read more about it at "Justice Department Looking into Google Book Settlement" and "Justice Dept. Opens Antitrust Inquiry Into Google Books Deal."

Six University Presses Get Mellon Grant for Archaeology of the Americas Digital Monograph Initiative

The Alabama Press, University of Arizona Press, the University Press of Colorado, the University Press of Florida, the Texas A&M University Press and the University of Utah Press have received a $282,000 one-year planning grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation for the Archaeology of the Americas Digital Monograph Initiative, a digital collection of New World archaeology scholarship.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Together, the institutions will explore ways to deliver data- and illustration-rich digital editions of cutting-edge archaeological research.

The project, the "Archaeology of the Americas Digital Monograph Initiative," will give scholars and professional archaeologists the ability to review supplemental data not often contained in conventionally published volumes.

"This initiative enables each press to break out of the traditional monograph form, in which it is often financially impossible to offer digital resources alongside the book," said Kathryn Conrad, interim director of the UA Press. . . .

The books produced as part of this initiative will be enhanced by large data sets, color illustrations, video components, three-dimensional, rotatable images, and in some cases, interactive components such as reader commenting. . . .

If the program reaches full implementation, the presses could potentially create a third-party entity devoted to the creation and maintenance of the digital platform.

The presses also plan to work on a business model for the proposed platform. In addition, the presses plan to develop a prototype digital book, providing a workable platform that could potentially be used by scholarly presses around the world.

Open Access: SPARC/ACRL Release SCOAP3—Frequently Asked Questions and Answers

SPARC and ACRL have released SCOAP3—Frequently Asked Questions and Answers.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Key details about the SCOAP3 innovative proposal to change the dynamics of publishing in High-Energy Physics are highlighted in a new set of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) from SPARC (the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition) and the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL).

SCOAP3, the Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access in Particle Physics Publishing, currently depends on expressions of interest from the U.S. library community before the experiment can move ahead. The proposal is currently supported by more than 100 U.S. libraries, by the Canadian Research Knowledge Network, and by libraries, consortia and funding agencies in 18 other countries.

Prepared in consultation with SCOAP3 and members of SPARC and ACRL, the FAQs aim to support U.S. libraries in evaluating their commitment to SCOAP3, and to clarify for all libraries details of the proposal and how the new model is intended to work. Issues addressed in the document include:

  • What is SCOAP3’s business model?
  • Why is it important for the library community to support the model?
  • What are some of the benefits it is hoped the model will achieve?
  • What can my library do to support SCOAP3?
  • What will be the relationship between arXiv and SCOAP3?
  • How can public universities legally participate in the project?
  • Which libraries & library consortia have committed to SCOAP3?

Foreign Opposition to the Google Book Search Settlement

Foreign opposition to the Google Book Search Settlement Agreement appears to be growing as the rights holder opt-out deadline nears.

Read more about it at "174 Writers, Poets Reject Google Book Search Offer"; "BA Warns Rights Holders over Google"; "Europeans Seem to Know Little About Google Settlement, But Enough Not to Like It"; and "German Authors Outraged at Google Book Search."

Google Asks Permission to Extend Author Opt-Out Deadline by 60 Days

Google has requested permission from the presiding court to extend the deadline for authors to opt out of the Google Book Search Settlement Agreement by 60 days.

Here's an excerpt from "Extending Notice on the Google Book Search Settlement":

It's pretty easy for credit card companies to contact their cardholders—they send bills to them all the time. The world's authors, publishers and their heirs are much more difficult to find. So, as the New York Times recently reported, the plaintiffs hired notice campaign specialists Kinsella Media Group to tell them about this exciting settlement, and Google has devoted millions of dollars to fund this notice campaign. . . .

The settlement is highly detailed, and we want to make sure rightsholders everywhere have enough time to think about it and make sure it's right for them. That's why we've asked the court for permission to extend the opt-out deadline for an extra 60 days.

Read more about it at "Delay Looming For Google Settlement Deadline?" and "Google Seeks More Time in Book Search Case."

Presentations from UK Serials Group’s 32nd Annual Conference Are Available

Presentations from UK Serials Group 32nd Annual Conference are now available (plenary sessions and breakout sessions).

Here's a quick sample:

Special Section in Economics Analysis and Policy on the Economics of Open Access

The latest issue of Economics Analysis and Policy has a special section devoted to the economics of open access (thanks to Christian Zimmermann).

Here are the articles:

Research Councils UK Releases Open Access to Research Outputs

Research Councils UK has released Open Access to Research Outputs (annexes).

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

RCUK published today an independent study commissioned by the Research Councils into open access to research outputs. The purpose of the study was to identify the effects and impacts of open access on publishing models and institutional repositories in light of national and international trends. This included the impact of open access on the quality and efficiency of scholarly outputs, specifically journal articles. The report presents options for the Research Councils to consider, such as maintaining the current variation in Research Councils' mandates, or moving towards increased open access, eventually leading to Gold Standard.

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

In "ALA Participates in ITIF Google Book Settlement Panel at Library of Congress," District Dispatch describes an ITIF meeting on "Copyright, Content and Class Action Lawsuits: A Debate on the Google Book Search Settlement" at the Library of Congress.

Here's an excerpt:

Yesterday, Dr. Alan Inouye, Director of the American Library Association’s Office for Information Technology Policy, participated in a panel called Copyright, Content and Class Action Lawsuits: A Debate on the Google Book Search Settlement. The talk was sponsored by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), and held at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. Dr. Inouye offered remarks on the proposed Google Book Settlement from the library and public interest perspective. Also contributing to the panel were Dr. Daniel Clancy, Engineering Director for Google Book Search, Allan Adler, VP of Government Affairs for the Association of American Publishers, and Peter Brantley, Director of Access for the Internet Archive. Daniel Castro, Senior Analyst at ITIF, moderated the panel discussion.

A digital video of the debate is available at the meeting web site.

Peter Hirtle on the Impact of the Google Book Settlement on Foreign Copyright Holders

In "Google Book Settlement, Orphan Works, and Foreign Works," Peter Hirtle discusses the impact of the Google Book Settlement on foreign copyright holders.

Here's an excerpt:

The scope of the foreign land grab could be considerable. Some initial estimates suggest that 7 million books could be included in the settlement. Of these it is estimated that 1 million are in the public domain. That would leave 6 million in-copyright but out-of-print books. Early efforts to try to understand the nature of the library collections that were being used to build the Google books database suggested that 50% of the works in the libraries were not in English, so it would be safe to say that at least 3 million of the books in the settlement will be foreign works. (Since Google added many European partners after this study was done, the number is likely to be much higher.) Some of these are going to be orphan works—but many more are going to have easily locatable rights holders that have chosen not to be active participants in the settlement. Their royalties are destined for the pockets of the Registry. I am willing to bet that a goodly percentage of the operating expenses of the Registry will come not from orphan works, but rather from foreign authors who do not understand the need to participate in the settlement.