Search News


Browse Archives

News

Pirates vs. University Presses

February 18, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

It's not exactly news that the Internet is a perfect tool for violating copyright. In book publishing, the big concern has been best sellers that can be scanned and uploaded, with the idea that there is a worldwide audience for the latest Harry Potter installment or Oprah recommendation. While most university press books don't have quite that commercial appeal, they are finding that they can still be the targets of pirates.

Press officials don't want to provide too many details about what they've found as they don't want to encourage people to download free copies of monographs, as they can do now in some cases. But those involved with anti-piracy efforts say that university presses are now targets of a number of sites. In a particularly disturbing trend, some presses are reporting that pre-publication digital editions are ending up on these piracy Web sites, raising concerns about the need to better track who has access to such versions.

Princeton University Press has emerged as something of an expert on the issue -- a distinction the press wishes it didn't have. Over the summer, an author the press declined to identify informed the publisher that his book was being made available for downloading in its entirety on one of these Web sites. For several months, Princeton had a staffer focused on identifying piracy sites with its books, and following up with "take down" notices that threaten legal action for keeping the books up. Some of the Web sites take the books down, but then others pop up. Most of these sites operate outside the United States and take advantage of countries with relatively loose copyright laws, at least as applied to digital publishing.

Daphne Ireland, director of intellectual property for the Princeton press, said that in the last year, it has succeeded in having several hundred books removed from Web sites where they were being offered free, in violation of copyright. About a half dozen of those books were in Internet galley form.

While the press is pleased with the progress it has made, regular vigilance is required to find more violations of copyright, and they keep popping up, Ireland said. While Princeton now does these checks regularly, it realizes it is missing things. "We have a limited amount of time to dedicate to it," Ireland said. "It's a real black hole you can get into, trying to find them all."

Ireland said that it is also important for presses to spread the word that such sites are not harmless and in fact hurt academic publishing. "We have to make our readers aware of the importance of university press publishing, and why they should not say 'It's OK for us to pirate this book.' "

Some of the pirate sites themselves are proud of their role.

Peter Sunde, one of the founders of the Pirate Bay, a Swedish operation that is at the center of these disputes, said via e-mail that he doesn't care if university presses are bothered by his organization's actions. "If I say the world is flat, does that make it true?" he asked.

He said copyright was irrelevant because "we're letting anyone share whatever they want with whomever they want. That's it.... Blaming us for what people do is like blaming the people who build roads for helping people rob banks, for God's sake."

In an action that publishers consider long overdue, Pirate Bay is facing a lawsuit in Sweden -- but while the university press world may have no sympathy, The Wall Street Journal reported that the start of proceedings featured a courtroom full of piracy supporters. In court, the Pirate Bay founders are arguing that they only operate a search engine.

Some university presses -- along with other publishers -- are trying to join forces to deal with the problem. The Association of American Publishers has helped a group of publishers jointly support the monitoring of pirate Web sites to identify violations. Edward McCoyd, who leads the effort for the association, said that while he did not want to release a list of members, university presses are involved. "We've found quite a bit of activity, including books from university presses," he said. At this point, the pirate sites are going after "every sector of publishing."

Peter J. Givler, executive director of the Association of American University Presses, said he expects the piracy issue to gain more attention in academic publishing. While fighting piracy is "labor intensive and expensive," he said presses couldn't ignore the issue or assume it wouldn't hit them. He described the Princeton experience as "a jolt" to other presses.

"We have all operated for the last few years with the idea that online piracy was something that publishers of Tolkien or science fiction had to worry about, but who would bother with the specialized books coming out of university presses?" Now, he said, it's clear that many will bother.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Pirates vs. University Presses

  • Another way to approach ‘Pirates vs. University Presses’
  • Posted by Charles Jones , Librarian at Institute for the Study of the Ancient World on February 18, 2009 at 9:25am EST
  • It would be interesting to see what would happen to sales of paper-based books from University Presses if they followed the lead of the a Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago [http://oi.uchicago.edu], and published simultaneous online (PDF, free-of-charge) editions of their books at the time of their appearance on paper. I have no doubt that many of these publishers would discover, as did the Oriental Institute, that their sales increase as a consequence of much wider publicity.

    See here [http://ancientworldbloggers.blogspot.com/2008/04/awol-ancient-world-online-2.html] for a full list of such books.

  • if you can't beat 'em...
  • Posted by Barbara Fister on February 18, 2009 at 9:46am EST
  • You could always try the approach of Yale Unbound, the National Academies, and Bloomsbury Academic and preemptively put copies on the internet, perhaps under a Creative Commons license.
    http://yupnet.org/home/
    http://nap.edu/
    http://www.bloomsburyacademic.com/

    NAP, which has done this for years, has found it doesn't harm sales at all - it actually increases visibility, and hence sales. And if it's any consolation, the students I talk to (and I ask regularly) would go to lengths to avoid reading a book on the Internet, can't fathom the price of Kindle, which looks like an old person's appliance anyway, and think reading books on a cell phone is a demented idea.

    Barbara

  • Posted by mt on February 18, 2009 at 9:46am EST
  • I'm very disappointed to see that nothing in this article illuminates the "Pirates'" motivation. After all, they have no financial interests, and in fact are investing a great deal of time, money and effort into the "piracy". So why are they doing it? Just for thrills?

    This is not good journalism. And manifests a pro-publisher bias.

  • Posted by Dave Stone , Professor of History at Kansas State on February 18, 2009 at 9:46am EST
  • I found my book on one of those sites. A cease-and-desist order appears to have gotten the book taken down, BUT a user reposted it almost immediately. The address of the domain name owner is in Samara, Russia, and so it's unclear what if any legal recourse is available in practical terms. The domain name registrar is GoDaddy, and that firm claims to have no jurisdiction or interest in what goes on in the sites that they register.

    I comfort myself with the apparent phenomenon that most downloads seem to come from developing countries where people are unlikely to purchase the physical book anyway. It's still annoying.

  • Battling Book Piracy
  • Posted by Dr. Rob on February 18, 2009 at 11:05am EST
  • First let me say that I do not condone the type of piratical activities described in this article; it is clearly stealing and a violation of copyright law. As well, in reading some of the comments I think several good ideas have been proposed to battle the problem of book piracy. However, I noticed that no one had mentioned the possibility of selling books for what they are really worth. As a university professor, I am appalled at the ridiculously high prices students have to pay for text books (i.e. $95.00 for a Humanities text book consisting of 12 chapters; or $50.00 for a 288-page book on how to teach history). I understand that my two examples are external book publishers, but the university presses are not exempt from the problem of exorbitantly high book prices. My point is that book prices are out of control. Right or wrong, the exorbitant prices forced on college students, and book purchasers in general, can only encourage some people to find creative ways to avoid being fleeced by book publishers--university presses or otherwise. So, another approach to battling book piracy might be to think about implementing pricing schemes that result in lower book prices-- prices that more accurately reflect the actual cost of publishing a book.

    This is a truly serious problem. It is a continual topic of discussion among faculty and students. And believe me there is a lot of anger out here. So, if book publishers will not become proactive in addressing this very serious concern, then, as this article points out, there are those that will find ways to circumvent the high prices of books. And, as the book pirates have discovered, technology makes it real easy. And finally, lets not forget about the creative genius of American college students. When they get wind of this information, book pirates will be the least of book publisher's problems.

  • Posted by Barbara Fister on February 18, 2009 at 11:35am EST
  • Textbook publishers, which are for-profit and are often driven by corporate owners who have little interest in publishing or education but are fascinated by the bottom line and growth, are one thing. University presses, which are trying to break even at best, are another. The prices they charge are the cost of doing business. I just think there may be better ways of doing business, and I know university presses are doing their best to figure them out.

    Al Greco and Robert Wharton recommend open access for UP books. It's worth thinking about.
    http://elpub.scix.net/data/works/att/149_elpub2008.content.pdf

  • Robin Hood syndrome
  • Posted by JP Craig on February 18, 2009 at 7:15pm EST
  • I think Dr. Rob is right: books are exorbitantly priced, even extortionately, given that they are required. And some departments really don't seem to care; at least their reading lists don't match their protestations of sympathy with students' pocketbooks.

    I think that a lot of the motivation behind pirating these texts, which sometimes means scanning them, a laborious process, and always means giving up bandwidth and taking a legal risk, comes from a desire to "stick it to the man." I am not saying this is right. But I am saying that "the man" is already sticking it to the students.

    I think the Robin Hood attitude is only made worse when students see how easy it is to disseminate information via the web in .PDF or whatever format. More and more students are quite happy to read and annotate right on the screen, and the physical text seems to them cumbersome in comparison, a deficit for which they are asked to pay.

  • Posted by Sam on February 19, 2009 at 5:45am EST
  • Here is a situation I've been in before.

    To someone who is not a part of a university, it is extremely difficult and expensive to acquire the books you need to continue research and intellectual inquiry. So you sometimes need to take a few liberties with copyrights. Cry me a river.

  • About the Pulisher
  • Posted by Small Publisher on February 19, 2009 at 9:35am EST
  • Book publishing, especially textbook publishing, is a very expensive and often not profitable business. Here is an example:

    The publisher pays to have the book laid out, proofread, and prepared for press.

    The publisher might pay $10 each to print 1000 hardcover copies of a book. Remember, this is low volume. Forget anything that you think you might know about printing books for $1.00 each. Those are significantly larger print runs.

    The publisher pays for the shipping to his or her warehouse.

    The publisher sells them on consignment to a book distributor for 55 to 60 Percent off the retail price. So, let's say $20 each, which puts the retail price at $50.

    The publisher pays for the shipping to the book distributor.

    Only half of the books sell, so the publisher has to take them back and send a refund for half the books to the distributor. This means that the printing price just doubled, to $20, because only half sold.

    The publisher pays the return shipping from the distributor.

    Anybody know anything about business? This publisher is out of business. They broke even on the print price, but they are out the cost of preparing the book for press, the shipping from the printer, the shipping to the distributor, the shipping back from the distributor, and any storage; and all because their book was retailed for the reasonable (?) price of $50.

    Anyway, go ahead, stick it to the publisher, drive them out of business; then we won't have to worry about the publication of scholarly activity anymore.

  • Posted by Unrepentant on February 19, 2009 at 10:10am EST
  • Many people (and the article author) are assuming that everyone who downloads the book will actually have bought it. Otherwise, the claim to stealing copyright in the sense of hurting the author/publisher's pocket book cannot be made. My guess is that this claim is wildly incorrect. People download tons of stuff that ends up collecting digital dust on their hard drives until they wipe them out. They would never read these books, and if they even look at them, they would probably never have bought them. And those who do download them, read them, and like them (and can afford them), are probably going to buy them. In the end, my guess is that the presses benefit from increased publicity. Come on, people, get a hold of yourselves. You (we) are not exactly selling high-demand items!

  • Copyright vs. Copyleft
  • Posted by Michael Rectenwald , Professor at NYU on February 19, 2009 at 11:40am EST
  • I teach a course that explores intellectual property as it developed in the 18th and 19th centuries from the Romantic ideology of the author. The underpinnings of intellectual property are specious at best. But in cases where it has been abolished, say in France after the Revolution, cultural anarchy and a race to the bottom ensued as publishers couldn't afford to publish lengthy or serious works and instead just printed what sold the most and the most quickly. This scenario should be considered in connection with all attempts at abolition of IP, yet it should not be forgotten that the marketplace is the sine qua non of such situations.

    To put it briefly, problems like this will never be solved under capitalism.

  • "Pirate" and other electronic editions
  • Posted by Michael on February 19, 2009 at 3:45pm EST
  • As someone who worked in university press publishing for many years I have to say this topic needs more study but it shouldn't be overhyped. This may be a problem of the larger "marquis" presses and not university press publishers as a whole.

    The two greatest problems I experienced were nothing like what the story describes.

    The first was when working with an author on a revised dissertation; we'd discover the original dissertation being sold at places like Amazon. It was not too difficult (though time-wasting) to have those removed.

    The second was the authors themselves posting their book manuscript, in whole or in part, at their personal webpage or their university webpage. This practice is astonishly common, and authors are remarkably naive to think their publisher would not object. The "instant gratification" the internet provides is proving too strong for many writers.

    Finally, regardless of any electronic copy floating around out there, our research indicated that serious readers still wanted to hold a physical copy of the book in their hands. Any loss in sales can be made up by publishing smarter, such as using digital instead of traditional printing, individualized print runs instead of "one size fits all," and still other tactics.

  • Posted by Publisher's perspective on February 19, 2009 at 3:45pm EST
  • Dr. Rob, you can look at yourself and your colleagues for a big part of the blame! When textbooks are produced, numerous ancillaries are required - websites, powerpoint presentations, test items, software for creating tests, overhead transparencies, videos, CDs, etc. etc. There's a textbook "arms race" driven by the very professors who make the decisions on which books to use, and if a publisher doesn't provide these resources, they don't make the cut.

    Similarly, most publishers offer less expensive versions of their texts - eBooks, briefer versions, black and white versions, etc. - but professors don't want these, they want "everything," and they want it for free.

    Professors don't pay for these books and ancillaries BTW, they get them for "free" from publishers, i.e., students buy them for professors. Maybe we should make professors pay for their desk copies and ancillaries! That would reduce costs to students.

    Another part of the equation is perception of value among students. An education is valuable! And yet there is zero shortage of students with expensive cell phone plans and $100 sneakers, who have no problem dropping money at a club on Friday night, and yet who see no value in buying, reading (and keeping) a textbook - for them the only real value is passing the course, getting the grade, getting the degree, and moving on - "screw knowledge!"

    For some reason there is a popular perception that the blood and sweat of authors that goes into these books (very, very few of them get rich BTW) should be a free service... a service that on the other hand isn't even valued. Shame on the self-serving ideology that feeds into this perception.

    Here's an idea: most university libraries provide a wealth of scholarly content for their patrons. How about, Dr. Rob, you assign a bunch of journal and primary source material readings to your students, and create and provide the pedagogical underpinnings in your own classroom? That way you don't have to tap into the textbook world at all, and your students won't have to buy any books whatsoever?

  • Posted by Jeff Riggenbach on February 19, 2009 at 6:20pm EST
  • Two Washington University (St. Louis) economists, Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine, recently published a book called "Against Intellectual Monopoly," in which they argue (in Levine's words) "that the only solution to the problem of intellectual monopoly is to get rid of it entirely." The book is published by Cambridge University Press, but is also available for free download on the authors' websites. Apparently, this is okay with Cambridge University Press. Perhaps there is something to the notion that (especially with regard to scholarly books) putting it on the Internet for free will wind up selling more copies?

    JR

  • Post-market
  • Posted by Connelly Barnes , Post-market at Princeton University on February 23, 2009 at 4:04pm EST
  • I don’t think most people in the “IP vs no IP” debate really understand it.

     

    First, the changes in Copyright are caused by technology. People think they can change the situation by using politics or their own human organizations, but this is false, as people aren’t central in the natural progression of technology. So people can debate or police, but it doesn’t matter, due to technological determinism, Copyright as a form of content control will either die or be transformed beyond recognition. Everyone should just set themselves up to be in the best position after the technological changes happen.

     

    Secondly, the decline of Copyright is causing a post-market system to come about. The 20th century was all about consumers and mass-production, but now these “economically rational” activities are being steadily eroded by billions of people spending their time mostly online doing “useless” or non-economic activities. Perhaps money will stay around, or be transformed, like Copyright, to have some new meaning, or disappear altogether. Who knows. But people should be thinking critically about what “markets” will even exist, and what these markets will mean. And then reason about what they should be doing, in ten years, rather than continuing to push on business as usual.

     

    Basically, I think a top-down approach is needed to understand the situation, rather than a “find the money” bottom-up approach.

  • Dr. Rob's Response to "Publishers Perspective"
  • Posted by Dr. Robb on February 26, 2009 at 2:30pm EST
  • First, let me say that from the sarcastic tone of your response, I would guess I struck a nerve. Assuming this is so, let me just say that my intent was to identify a problem—and as you have succinctly described, there are a lot of factors that contribute to the problem.

    That said, I would like to briefly respond to some of your comments” First, I cannot speak for my colleagues, but I am doing my part to reduce the burden of book costs for my students as best I can. Granted, I do use a required text and readings book (McGraw Hill) because of the quality of the content and relatively speaking, the books are less expensive and there is an ample supply of used copies. I create my own tests, publisher test banks tend to be pretty weak; I create my own power points; and as far as CDs and videos, I either purchase them out of pocket, or I use free audio and video sites available on the web.

    While professors do expect that they will get a free copy of textbooks they adopt, my personal library is filled with unsolicited exam copies of texts from numerous publishers. I assume, I am not the only one receiving them. With the exception of adopted textbooks, my personal library, and I imagine the libraries of my colleagues, are filled with volumes of books which I have paid for with my own financial resources. I would add there are a bunch of books out there I would love to purchase, but I cannot afford the $30-70 price tag.

    You will get no argument from me with the matter of perceived value. The seeming lack of curiosity and love for knowledge is as troubling to me and my colleagues as it is to you.

    I have no problem with authors being paid for their work. They work hard and are deserving of what little compensation they receive. While professors may not be getting rich, based on the price of books I see, somebody is.

    As to your final suggestion, I think it is a very good one. In fact, I am moving in that direction. I already include a long list of links to full-text electronic versions of classic literature and books in my syllabus. Having said all of this (and the dialogue has been fun) for me, the whole point of the discussion is to highlight the problem of the exorbitant costs of textbooks. I am not anti-publishers or anti-textbooks. But I do sincerely believe that textbook prices are out of control. As you have rightly pointed out, universities and colleges, the professoriate, and book publishers all have a hand in the problem. The three need to work together to resolve the problem.