Newsgroups: bit.listserv.vpiej-l
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 12:56:00 EDT
              and Access" <VPIEJ-L@VTVM1.BITNET>
From:         GMP@PSUVM.BITNET
Subject:      Copyrights and profit motive

    I am an author and editor.  It is my full time profession now, but I have
been working for publishing houses for the last 25 years.  I know authors of
all kinds, from threadbare poets to high powered "self help" book writers.
I know that scholarly writers do not do it for profit. Although a first year
academic publishing in a quality journal can expedite promotion and tenure,
raise salary, which in turn raises TIAA contributions which, according to
an accountant colleague of mine, could make an article worth about $60,000
over a lifetime in 1990 dollars.  Electronic publishing can appeal to this
kind of motivation.

    I have just begun a stint as editor of an electronic journal.  I have my
accountant friend keeping very close track of the costs of "publishing" and
distributing a Ejournal. I suspect they are somewhat less than a paper
journal (about $15,000 and issue), but we will know soon.  Figuring out how
to make a profit on scholarly publishing is silly.  No one makes a profit
on journals except for companies who contract with associations who guarantee
a certain number of copies sold to the membership. That plus standing orders
to libraries covers the cost and adds a margin of profit. For some houses, this
can be considerable.

    Protecting copyrights is not as complicated as you think. For one thing,
academics violate copyrights all over the place.  Academics steal chapters
from their colleagues and xerox them for "student packets." They do not even
bother asking permission.  There are several lawsuits going on about this
matter.  Used book publishers make money on someone else's authorship.  There
is a national organization working on this, too.  There are very few authors
who make a living at it.  A good text will sell for the first two years, but
if it does not hit 50,000 copies, everyone loses money.  A scholarly mono-
graph can get by with a sale of 750, if you price it high enough and have
some libraries as regular customers.  It doesn't matter who you steal with,
if theft is the norm, an I assure you, there are few academics who haven't
"borrowed" text without paying the fee and most of the time with precious
little acknowledgment.

    At the moment, those who want to do Epublishing are eleemosynary and
there is nothing to be done about it.  But it will probably be no worse than
in print publishing.  When some major trade publisher decides there is a buck
to be made on electronic publishing, they will, no doubt, contract with
Compuserv on a fee basis and do it like pay-per-view cable.  The technology
for this already exists, but it is expensive.  On the other hand, it is
no more expensive that chopping a thousand trees, producing paper pulp and
turning it into newsprint, cutting it, printing the pages, and binding them
and then shipping them to individuals and dealers.  How many of us can afford
this?

    Now, the final issue -- Epublishing could mean a lot to academics seeking
promotion and tenure.  We have yet to document the credibility of Epublication
and so electronic journals do not attract contributions.  I would argue that
it is absolutely necessary to distinguish between genres of publication. There
are some Epublications that qualify as newsletters; some as op-ed bulletins;
some as calendars of events.  Some are quasi-scholarly, like the ones that
feature an article with several commentaries and a rejoinder. This is an
exciting form of publishing, but it doesn't make it with the "dean's promo-
tion and tenure review committee."

    In the Ejournal I have been asked to edit, we are going to try to qualify
for promotion and tenure consideration on a reasonable level.  I suspect
Harvard and Princeton would ignore us, but I think we could make it in the
Big Ten given our editorial board and review policy (and if you can make it
there, you can make it anywhere).

    In sum, we must do our best to maintain scholarly standards, post a
copyright notice, and hope for the best.  We have been doing this in print
publishing for several years.  You would be amazed at the number of companies
that have taken Chapter 11, and I suspect a number of Epublications will go
under.  Piracy and copyright violation play a major role, but unless you
want some form of thought police, or imposition of complex and expensive
controls, you are stuck with doing the best you can.

    I hereby release rights to this text and acknowledge that it was
inspired by the contribution of Kimberly Parker.

Gerald M. Phillips
Editor: _Interpersonal Computing and Technology: A Journal for the 21st
Century_
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU