So, neither the review process or the quality of publication that results will necessarily change if new approaches are taken to publication of the results of academic research. David Goodstein notes in The Tragedy of the Commons that the journals have evolved primarily to serve the needs of the writers, not the readers, that scholarly journals are vanity presses. Authors and publishers profit from the proliferation of journals, only the library budget suffers. Certainly, there are a small number of books written by faculty members that have produced substantial revenues. However, even for books, that is unusual.
Most books produce modest revenues, indeed.
The issue of income has to be addressed as we discuss copyright policy, but it is not the primary concern. No matter what, distribution will cost money, and that money will have to be provided by the scientific community and its sponsors. We feel that the key issue in the evolving debate on copyright is access. The owner of the copyright is in a position to control access to that work. In the case of a movie, a novel, a recording, or a computer program, that control may work to the benefit of the creator of the work because royalties can be demanded by the copyright holder.