7.2 THE LATEST ON GORDON & BREACH VS BARSCHALL, Chuck Hamaker and Marcia Tuttle
7.3 THE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY: SEMINAR ANNOUNCEMENT, Brian Kahin
7.4 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE MEETING, Henry H. Barschall
7.5 SOCIETY FOR SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING, ELEVENTH ANNUAL MEETING, Katina Strauch
7.6 HAMAKER'S HAYMAKERS, Chuck Hamaker
We have a detailed report in this issue of the Annual Meeting of the Society for Scholarly Publishing. Rather than attempt to repeat this for the NASIG Conference and the Medical Library Association Conference, I direct you to the June 1989 issue (vol. 4, no. 3) of the NASIG NEWSLETTER. It has very fine reports from Bill Robnett (NASIG) and Judith Rieke (MLA). Also included is a report by Keith Courtney of the Fifth International Learned Journals Seminar, held in London on April 7. The August issue contains reports on the Special Libraries Association Conference (by Virginia Reed) and serials related matters at the Canadian Library Association Conference (by Susan Collins). If you are not a NASIG member, the June and August issues of the newsletter are available for $2.00 each from the editor: Lenore Rae Wilkas, One Veterans Square, Apt. D-2, Media PA 19063.
Again, my apologies for such a long time between issues. I was in Australia and away from my computer. My strongest feeling upon returning is: ...And we think WE've got problems! I learned from Australian librarians and vendors about all the same problems we have with serials prices, but even more severe geographical price discrimination and fluctuating currency exchange rates, all compounded by isolation. To make matters worse, the Australians have not been able to discuss this situation with journal publishers as Americans and Europeans have, because there are very few Australian publishers at all, and those are not the ones involved in the pricing crisis. The Australian Serials Special Interest Group (ASSIG) is a new, well-organized, and very active body of agents and librarians (with a few publisher representatives), which works with other library acquisitions groups to present seminars and workshops throughout the continent. I thank them for the opportunity to meet with them, and I wish them well in their further efforts.
Did you see the notice in "Cross Currents" in the September 1 issue of PUBLISHERS WEEKLY about Robert Maxwell being "in the interesting position of owning 14% of a publisher he's suing"? The details are on page 11.
We are making progress toward having the newsletter available on ALANET. That edition is especially vital, because many subscription agents, publishers, and societies with no access to BITNET do have ALANET id's. Thanks to Jane Maddox of Harrassowitz and Carson Holloway of EBSCO for their help and encouragement.
It was exciting to see this newsletter mentioned on the electronic Public-Access Computer Systems Forum (more information from Charles Bailey, University of Houston, BITNET: LIB3@UHUPVM1), but I must disagree with one comment of the reporter (R.W. Meyer from Clemson), who says,"It isn't a big step from here to a refereed version." Our mission is to disseminate news widely and quickly. I do not believe the contents of the newsletter are appropriate for refereeing. Verifying, yes, but not refereeing. Does anyone disagree? I'd like to hear from you.
PROGRESS on the assignment of an ISSN for the newsletter. It is in process and should appear in the appropriate location on the next issue.
7.2 LATEST ON GORDON & BREACH VS BARSCHALL
Chuck Hamaker, BITNET: NOTCAH@LSUVM, and Marcia Tuttle
Chuck sends this report, confirmed by Chris Schneider of G & B:
After the newsletter supplement on Gordon & Breach went out, I spoke with Chris Schneider about the lawsuits planned or in process against Henry Barschall, AIP, et al. Chris indicated that Gordon & Breach felt that misinformation was part of the problem with the Barschall data in PHYSICS TODAY and that the only redress G & B had after having explored options for retractions or publication of a counterview with the American Institute of Physics was through the courts. Information regarding reasons for the deposit, mentioned in the newsletter supplement, regarding the Swiss suit was apparently untrue. Rumors of a Japanese suit could not be verified. The intention of the legal actions is not to put a damper on factual discussion, but to ensure that articles do not publish misinformation, a position Gordon & Breach has consistently taken over the last couple of years in other cases of publication of information about their titles.
The aforementioned Public-Access Computer Systems Forum had a message from Charles Bailey on August 16 concerning a letter from the Association of Research Libraries on this topic. ARL "is looking at ways to provide support for the defendants." Bailey continues, "Whether you believe that this method of ranking the cost of journals has validity or not, a four-country lawsuit against Dr. Barschall and his co-defendants has significant implications in terms of the future free exchange of ideas about the current serials crisis and possible efforts to solve this crisis."
The September 4 issue of THE SCIENTIST (vol. 3, no. 17, 1989, pages 4 and 26) contains a lengthy account by Ken Kalfus entitled "Scientific Publisher Sues Over Journal Pricing Study." It reviews the background of the case and quotes lawyers for both sides. The publisher "does not intend to inhibit research," as librarians fear. Its Zurich lawyer is quoted as saying, "Our argument is that research is wonderful, but please don't make research with wrong figures, and please explain how the research was done. We feel that this was not duly done. Everything that they could do wrong they did wrong."
This newsletter will have in the next issue a report by Karen Muller, Executive Director of ALCTS and LAMA, of activities at the recent IFLA conference in Paris regarding the lawsuits and their implications.
Finally, the September issue of AMERICAN LIBRARIES has a report.
7.3 THE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY: SEMINAR ANNOUNCEMENT
Brian Kahin, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, BITNET: KAHIN@HULAW1
The Electronic Library: Vision and Implementation MIT Communications Forum October 26, 1989 2:00 - 6:00 p.m. Bartos Theater Bldg. E15 Lower Level 20 Ames Street Cambridge MA Vinton Cerf, Corporation for National Research Initiatives Patricia Battin, Commission on Preservation and Access Steven Lerman, MIT Mark Kibbey, Project Mercury, Carnegie-Mellon University Gregory A. Jackson, Harvard Graduate School of Education John Garrett, Copyright Clearance CenterComputer-enhanced access to information, low-cost mass storage, and the emergence of high-bandwidth networks are making feasible a new concept of the library. The "electronic library" has evolved beyond library automation to encompass profound transformations in scholarly communication, publication, and research -- and to represent a vision of an institution without walls and without circulating books.
Realizing the vision of the electronic library will entail creating new institutions as well as transforming old ones. It will require resolving difficult technological, cultural, economic, and legal issues. This seminar will present visions of the electronic library, perspectives of user, publisher, and library communities, and strategies for implementation.
For further information, call (617) 253-3144.
7.4 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE MEETING
Henry H. Barschall, University of Wisconsin at Madison, BITNET: NUCLEAR@WISCNUC.
The AAAS 1990 meeting is in New Orleans. The session on the Crisis in Science Libraries will be in the morning of 17 February 1990. The speakers will be October R. Ivins (Louisiana State University Library), Charles R. Ellis (Wiley), A. F. Spilhaus (American Geophysical Union), and Robert K. Peet (Biology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill). The talks will be followed by a panel discussion.
7.5 SOCIETY FOR SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING, ELEVENTH ANNUAL MEETING
Katina Strauch, College of Charleston Library (DataLinx: Strauch)
The Society for Scholarly Publishing held its eleventh annual meeting May 30 through June 2, 1989, in Washington DC. The theme of the meeting was PUBLISHING: THE NEXT GENERATION. The "subtitle" read: New Technology and Publishing; Where We Are Now, Where We May Be Going, and Some Thoughts on How to Get There. The majority of participants were publishers, with very few librarians in evidence.
In the keynote address, Frederick Bowes, Director of Publishing Operations for the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, stressed that the publishing environment is changing and scholarly publishing must respond to that change. He discussed some of the most interesting recent developments: FAX, which he said was a "mixed blessing"; CD-ROM, which has captured the imagination of publishers and libraries; desktop publishing, with its remarkable new options; and electronic networks. Pointing to several trends, he said that publishers must get used to wider and easier dissemination of their material and some of the problems this entails, especially regarding right of access versus copyright. The market for electronic products will provide slow revenues at first, and the cost of innovation will be high. Using the analogy of climbers on rock, he urged trust and goodwill among scholars, publishers, and librarians.
The first session was entitled "New `Publishing' Opportunities." The first speaker, Bernard Rous, Associate Director of Publications at the Association of Computing Machinery, discussed "Hypertext," which he described not as a distribution medium, but rather as "a way of organizing information that maximizes readers' options for accessing it." Describing ACM efforts regarding Hypertext, Rous stressed the need for publishers to get closer to the technology, to use it, and to learn how it can be used in the future.
William Y. Arms, Vice President for Academic Services at Carnegie Mellon University, spoke next on the topic "Electronic Library at Carnegie Mellon," one of the most computer-intensive universities in the country. Pointing to the fact that storing a CD-ROM is cheaper than library shelving, he predicted that in ten years storage would be cheaper on computer than in libraries. The advantages of an electronic library are access from anywhere in the network, the ability to search and retrieve information quickly, and the ability to keep information current using a master copy which is always up-to-date. So, the electronic library has the potential to be cheaper than the traditional library, which may free up money for materials rather than storage. The electronic library will be the work of many organizations. We must find a way to inspire people to move into the electronic world, keeping in mind that authors want distribution, consistency, integrity, and royalties; publishers want control of content, distribution, and revenue; and libraries want use by the academic community and cost control. In addition, "none of us are organized to handle change." To conclude, Arms talked about intellectual property and the electronic library, raising several important issues. How can distribution and access to electronic information be controlled? How should access to electronic information be billed? How about copyright? And what other legal, technical, and ethical issues exist?
The last speaker on this panel was Gregory Crane, Editor-in-Chief of the Perseus Project of the Department of the Classics at Harvard University. In an intriguingly detailed talk, Crane discussed how an interactive curriculum in classical civilization has been designed at Harvard (apparently made possible by a grant from Apple Computer). Stating that in the humanities ten years is not a reasonable period of time, Crane described how, with this "enabling technology," a historical atlas can be accessed, how different textual editions can be compared, and how vocabulary can be analyzed. Frankly, I had never given much thought to battle strategy in the Persian Wars, but watching Dr. Crane's illustrations from the Perseus Project made the whole exercise come to life! Apparently grant monies are running out, so Harvard will offer an RFP in the fall to locate publishers interested in continuing the project.
The luncheon speaker was Joshua Lederberg, President of Rockefeller University, as well as Chairman of the Board of ANNUAL REVIEWS and a member of the Board of the Institute for Scientific Information. Describing himself as both a researcher and a consumer of information, Lederberg gave a thought-provoking and at times profound talk, which is impossible to summarize adequately. The explosion of scientific information (almost doubling every decade) has caused problems for us all. The book is here to stay as a collection of material on a coherent subject by a single author or multiple authors. Journals, however, provide radically different access. The information is needed in varying degrees by varying user groups. Lederberg spoke of FAX, shared databases, etc., and some of the "prototype dilemmas" which are emerging regarding copyright and property rights, for example. Using Aristophanes' parody of the frogs, Lederberg called for a "network of citation and comment," which would allow scholars to comment frankly (possibly in an electronic environment) on published works.
In the afternoon, Session II dealt with intellectual property rights. Louise Levy, Information Alerting and Document Supply Services Manager, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Libraries and Information Systems Center, described her work environment (certainly close to ideal for many of us!) and foresaw a new environment of network-based optical service. Obviously a visionary, she urged people to question assumptions and jump in and try new approaches.
John R. Garrett, Manager of Business Development at the Copyright Clearance Center, spoke about how the publishing industry will respond to some of the issues raised by electronic access to and transmission of information. Authors, users, governments, and publishers are all trying to determine a common ground. In many cases, the question of pricing for these services is moot until we know the uses which will be made of the information.
Brian Kahin, an attorney, spoke about the difference between contracts and law. Copyright is a law. Contracts to buy materials (such as CD-ROM) are a process of negotiation. CD-ROM publishers have learned from audiovisual software publishers, Kahin said. If they sell their product, they cannot govern it really. However, if there is a lease, they can more adequately control what happens to their product through contractual provisions. Kahin pointed out that Section 117 of the Copyright Law has some special provisions for computer programs, including some definitions. If a contract cannot be proved, the Copyright Law may be used to get a better remedy. Kahin also raised some interesting questions, especially about derivative works and their definition through legal precedent and public display (are libraries using booths for video viewing, providing a public display?).
The final speaker of the day was Carol Risher, Director, Copyright and New Technology, Association of American Publishers. Her topic was "Current Issues in Copyright." Risher, who obviously eats, drinks, and breathes copyright, gave a detailed overview of many court cases, rulings, and other regulations. Here are a few of the high spots. Speaking about the case of BV Engineering vs UCLA, in which a recent court decision ruled that states and their institutions are immune from copyright violation suits, Risher stated that it was Congressional intent that states be liable for copyright violations, and legislation is pending on this issue. Adabar Publishers vs Kinko's Graphics is a pending case which is being litigated by the Association of American Publishers (interestingly enough, later in the program a lawyer from Kinko's spoke). In this case, AAP says that it is against the law to make anthologies when it is not spontaneous. This is indeed an important case, and we should all await the outcome.
Session III, "Marketing Electronic Information," began on Thursday morning, June 1, with Theresa Murtha, Director of Information Services at J.B. Lippincott, who spoke about marketing and selling CD-ROM products. "Selling CD-ROM products is missionary work," she stated, as you are currently selling a "concept." The demand for the electronic product is increasing. Publishers probably cannot use their existing sales staff to market electronic products, because a different sales strategy must be adopted. Instruction and support services are also necessary, which is not the case with books.
Barbara Meyers, Meyers Consulting Services, spoke next about "Market Research and Electronic Products: The Same only Different." "If we knew what we were doing, we wouldn't call it research," Meyers said. Market research concerning these products isn't a luxury; it is a necessity.
The next speaker was John Hearty, of the American Chemical Society, who spoke about some of the endeavors of the Society regarding full text chemical journals databases and the opportunities for scholarly electronic publishing. Regarding full text, Hearty spoke of the necessity for large backfiles, the difficulty of storing tabular data online, and the difficulties of promoting this product. He counseled publishers to market their own information, rather than depending on vendors to do so. The electronic journal has come of age in all of its three components: the technological, the editorial, and the user component.
Richard Wood, Senior Vice President, Business Development with University Microfilms International, spoke next about techniques for "launching" products such as field sales, telephone sales, direct mail, advertising, exhibits, etc. CD-ROM now has the advantage of being a novelty, but is the market real? how large is the market? how much money should be used to develop a CD-ROM product? and what will be its speed of acceptance? Stating that providing a certain level of service for these products is the publisher's "bonding" with the customer, Wood said that when something goes wrong with a product, the customer doesn't care whose fault it is and has a high expectation level.
Anne Leinbach, Director of Marketing and Product Management at the Institute for Scientific Information, spoke about some of ISI's specific experiences with CD-ROM. This format has really taken off in the library market. In some cases sales have exceeded annual forecast figures. There are issues regarding equipment and local area networks about this technology, which is expensive to produce and is a "mature" product. There are problems with standards regarding CD drives and DOS extensions. Leinbach stated categorically that the CD-ROM product "must have a value added" to the print version, meaning, for example, that you can manipulate online what you cannot with the print version. Leinbach pointed to the fact that ISI has "beta test sites" to improve their CD-ROM products. Other issues include the need to help the library with the end user, who in many cases is using the CD-ROM in the library. She also spoke of the necessity of protecting print revenues and the fact that publishers haven't seen huge cancellations of print because of CD-ROM products.
After a coffee break, Session IV dealt with "What Libraries Really Want from Publishers," chaired by Richard M. Dougherty, of the University of Michigan School of Information and Library Studies. The first speaker was Katina Strauch (College of Charleston), who spoke about the ideal world of libraries where information was free and price was determined by a committee of librarians. She asked publishers to be aware of some trends in libraries which might impact their market.
The next speaker was October Ivins (Louisiana State University), who spoke about two recent SSP meetings, at Chapel Hill and Lake Arrowhead. Stating that the gap is now too large between publishers and librarians, she counseled publishers to talk to their market before making changes, to keep costs down, and to continue working for quality control.
The final speaker on the panel was Hendrik Edelman, of the School of Communications, Information and Library Studies at Rutgers. Edelman called for "quality management and public accountability." Stating that you cannot evaluate yourself unless you have standards, and pointing out the need for a thorough self-study of quality in publishing, Edelman proposed that an outside panel check what publishers are doing. Citing some cases of fraud in research and publishing, Edelman questioned whether the community can police itself.
Words became heated when Alan Wittman, one of the meeting co-chairs, stated that librarians needed to curtail some of what was happening and to search for other funding sources. The newly-released ARL report was brought up, but few members present were familiar with it.
After a "networking luncheon," Gretchen Oberfranc, Manager of Electronic Publishing at Princeton University Press, spoke for one of only two university presses (Princeton and Toronto) owning their printing plant. Oberfranc's discussion was very specific regarding disc translation, compositors, and types of equipment. An interesting point related to authors' access to information on discs and the extent to which authors can become involved in indexing, editing, and page composition.
Charles Creesy, Computer Administrator, also at Princeton University Press, spoke in detail about "Publishing for the Desktop: What You Need to Get Started." Stating that the three reasons for desktop publishing were to save dollars (maybe), to save time (maybe), and to control your own production, Creesy compared various desktop packages such as Pagemaker, Ventura, and Ready Set Go, on all cost levels: low, medium, and high.
The final speaker of the day was Kurt Koenig, Vice President, Copyright and Trademark Counsel, Kinko's. According to Koenig, Kinko's is one of the largest copy shops in the U.S. and Canada and is a "full service copy center." It began nineteen years ago and derives its name from the fact that its founder had kinky, curly red hair. Speaking about the Professor Publishing Program, Koenig, whose enthusiasm was admirable, said that the Program allowed professors to produce miniature textbooks which were topical, timely, and up-to-date. This has evolved, he said, because of the high costs of textbooks, the "publishing infrastructure," the timing (Kinko's has one-day turnaround), and the ability to make short print runs of these instructor- specific texts. Koenig went to great lengths to explain how Kinko's keeps records in order to ensure conformity with Copyright Clearance Center guidelines and to detail how these records would be improved in the future. He stated that some publishers respond to permission requests in a more timely fashion than others. Stating that publishers would have to give up control over distribution in the future, Koenig said that the electronic publishing environment needs a means of tracking rights and distribution practices. Pointing out that the worst word in business is "inventory," and that the Chairman of Kinko's says that the cost of inventorying one copy or ten copies is the same, Koenig's world seemed to be one of on demand publishing where copies could be made on disc, on paper, on CD-ROM, or even, holographically, in the sky. Alluding to the lawsuit by the AAP versus Kinko's, brought up by Carol Risher the day before, Koenig contended that Kinko's is selling directly to the student at the cost of a copy plus royalties, and that this is a source of revenue for the publisher. Needless to say, the results of the suit will be interesting.
Thursday night brought a reception and dinner followed by an address by the President of the Association of American Publishers, Nicholas Veliotes. Tall and slim and in dark glasses, Veliotes spoke at great length about the past year with the AAP, happenings, court cases, and other issues. Mentioned, among many, many other things (his fascinating speech ran 45 minutes!), were the BV Engineering vs UCLA case (see speech by Risher), the AAP vs Kinko's case alluded to earlier, and the problem of sales by professors of review copies, causing an estimated loss in sales to publishers of 80 million dollars.
Friday's Session VI was entitled "High Pressure Publishing and Growing Ethical Concerns." The first speaker was Edward Huth, Editor of the ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE. He stated that the title of the session assumed that there were ethical standards agreed on in publishing, but this is not necessarily the case. There is not general agreement on ethical standards in publishing. THE STYLE MANUAL OF THE COUNCIL OF BIOLOGY EDITORS could be called a standard, and all scientists have an unwritten contract with their contemporaries. There are problems of fraud, plagiarism, wasteful publication, and duplicate or fragmented publication. Harking back to the 1950s, Huth pointed out that this is not the only period of time in which we have had fraud in research. The problem is, why is the issue surfacing now? Huth cited the size of biomedical research and the fact that the news media in the past ten or twenty years have paid more attention to science.
Diana Zuckerman, Congressional Aide to Congressman Ted Weiss, spoke next. Zuckerman, apparently once herself a "whistleblower," gave an extremely detailed and fascinating account of several specific cases of fraud, plagiarism, and bias in research that have come up for Congressional intervention. Pointing out that waste can be caused by both too much money and not enough money, Zuckerman spoke about the difficulty of retracting published work and financial conflicts of interest which may arise. The law is not clear on anything, however, and specific cases should be put in perspective. By and large, the system works well. There is a tendency for all of us to focus on what is not working. At the very least, we should be worried about the capacity of our institutions to deal with these concerns quickly and in some fair way.
The last speaker was Dr. Thomas Kennedy, Association of American Medical Colleges, speaking about specific actions taken by specific associations to deal with fraud, bias, and plagiarism in research. Pointing out the rapid progress in science over the past four decades, Kennedy said that there is a partnership between Congress and academe that cannot be derailed by fraudulent science. He went through the AAMC Policy Statement of June, 1982, which attempted to deal with these issues and which has stood the test of time. The National Science Foundation has also recently adopted regulations. Many issues must be discussed and resolved: who owns research can pose problems; we need guidelines for storing raw data and access to raw data by outsiders. Some whistleblowers are good and others are bad, but what can be done to make them immune from retaliation? Legislation is needed here. Also, investigation of complaints is time-consuming, and it is hard to persuade local faculty (and many times outside faculty) to participate. There is reason to believe that medical scholars on average haven't dealt with the problem of bias and fraud in research. This needs to be changed.
The SSP Annual Meeting was excellent. The proceedings will be published. I recommend them. For further information regarding the proceedings, contact SSP, 1918 18th Street, NW, Washington DC 20009. Prepaid price (before December 31, 1989: $15.00).
**Another version of this report will be published in AGAINST THE GRAIN, published by Katina Strauch, Charleston SC.
7.6 HAMAKER'S HAYMAKERS
Chuck Hamaker, Louisiana State University Library, BITNET: NOTCAH@LSUVM
PUBLISHERS WEEKLY (September 1, 1989), page 8, notes that a libel suit brought by David Price, an FBI agent who charged he was libelled in the book IN THE SPIRIT OF CRAZY HORSE, was dismissed by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. The court granted summary judgment to the defendants, Viking and Peter Mathiessen, the author of the book. The court wrote: "Sometimes it is difficult to write about controversial events without getting into some controversy along the way. In this setting, we have decided that the Constitution requires more speech rather than less....In deciding this case we have searched diligently for fault and ignored certain injury. But there is a larger injury to be considered, the damage done to every American when a book is pulled from a shelf, as in this case, or when an idea is not circulated." Price, who played a role in the investigation during the 1970s of a shootout at the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota in which two FBI agents were killed, claimed he was defamed by Mattheissen's recounting of allegations made by judges, members of Congress, news accounts and editorials. In the Price decision, the Court focused on "whether the reports were accurate reflections of what was said or done. Evidence of the author's general disposition toward his topic does not establish whether he espoused each particular allegation." I thought everyone should be aware of the direction U.S. court practice is going in this area.
Readers of the NEWSLETTER ON SERIALS PRICING ISSUES are encouraged to share their copies with colleagues, either electronically or on paper. We would appreciate credit if you quote from the newsletter.