Association Of American Publishers Research Articles

Notes on Contributors

Notes on Contributors

ACS Central Science wins PROSE innovation award

ACS Central Science, the American Chemical Society’s first fully open access journal, has won the PROSE Journal/Award for Innovation from the Association of American Publishers. The award recognize...

The Effect of Presentation Types and Flow on E-Book Purchase Intention

E-book has grown into a revolutionary way of publishing due to the rapid development of mobile technologies. The Association of American Publishers (AAP) revealed that E-book sales were down in 2014. Many designers consider E-book should be produced with dynamic format to increase purchase behavior. This study focuses on individual users’ perceived characteristics of innovation and the flow of e-books with different presentation types as explanatory and predictive variables impacting the purchase behavior of users. The experiment was conducted using 200 student volunteers at a comprehensive university. There are significant differences in the perceived characteristics of innovation, flow and purchase intention for different presentation types of e-book readers. Flow is an important factor influencing the e-book purchase intention and carries the same weight in each group tested. For reading static e-book content on a tablet, users’ perceived observability and flow have positive impacts on their purchase intention. Conversely, users’ perceived complexity has a negative effect on their purchase intention. The research results suggest that designers and publishing companies produce static, not dynamic e-books for use on the tablet to increase E-book sales.

Introduction to the “15th Anniversary Issue” of Epilepsy & Behavior

This Special Issue of Epilepsy & Behavior is dedicated to its 15th anniversary. Initiated in 2000 by Editor-in-Chief Steve Schachter with Associate Editors Christian Elger andOrrin Devinsky and an initial editorial board of 37 distinguished leaders in the field, E&B has now logged 15 years during which time over 4000 papers have been published. Publications in E&B have included clinical and basic science reports, commentaries, brief communications, classics in epilepsy, letters to the editor, meeting summaries, and other special sections. Concluding its first year with a total of 130 submissions, when it was named Best New Journal in theMedical, Technical, and Science Division by the Association of American Publishers, E&B is on the path to finish 2014 with over 700 submissions and 500,000 full-text downloads— remarkable numbers over a short time frame that are a testament to its current and growing presence in epilepsy research. In addition, its sister journal — Epilepsy & Behavior Case Reports now in its second year, is on pace to receive 80 submissions in 2014. Included in this Special Issue are letters from current and past members of E&B's editorial board, frequent E&B contributors, and others associated with the journal that provide unique views and opinions about E&B. The specific contributions in this Special Issue include an examination of the E&B papers that have been the most highly

THE SONG OF THE SIRENS

Numerous scholars have highlighted the extraordinary book-scanning project created by Google in 2004. The project aims to create a digital full-text search index which would provide people with online access to books and assist research. A few months after the original idea started being implemented, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers filed a class-action lawsuit, claiming that the Google Books Project violated copyright law in the United States. The Google Books Project radically changed its character from the time of its birth until the negotiation of an Amended Settlement Agreement (ASA) with the plaintiffs. It has raised serious controversies not only regarding different aspects of the future of the Internet but also over the issue of privatization of knowledge. Those in favour of the initiative highlight the astonishing accomplishment of Google, allowing us to access books more easily than ever before in human history. However, their claim is as dangerous as the song of the sirens. While at first sight Google tells a tale of extraordinary inclusion, it excludes those who cannot pay to access snippets or limited view of around 80% of the books available. We also discuss the ASA of Google with the Authors Guild and its failure on March 2011. Finally, we explore the concept of ‘fair use’, or ‘exceptions and limitations on copyright’, which provides for full access to books to any individual, library or archive as long as they are used for educational or scientific purposes.

Jeff John Roberts: The Battle for the Books: Inside Google’s Gambit to Create the World’s Biggest Library

Nearly a quarter of U.S. adults read an ebook in 2012, and ebooks now make up over 20 % of big U.S. trade publishers’ revenues. With tablets, smartphones and e-readers becoming ever cheaper, it is clear that the digital reading revolution is here to stay. This revolution has potential to give everyday readers access to books they might never have had the chance to discover or read before, straight from any internet-connected device. But, as Jeff John Roberts makes clear in his new short ebook ‘‘The Battle for the Books: Inside Google’s Gambit to Create the World’s Biggest Library,’’ conflicts between authors, publishers and technology companies make the goal of creating a universal digital library difficult to achieve. In ‘‘The Battle for the Books,’’ Roberts—my colleague at GigaOM’s paidContent tech news website—explores Google’s seven-year quest to create a modern-day Library of Alexandria. Unlike the ancient Egyptian version, however, Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin’s digital library could never be destroyed. Starting in 2004, Google began to explore how to carry out the gargantuan task of digitizing all the books in the world and creating a searchable Internet database where anybody could access them. In a 2004 editorial, the New York Times wrote, ‘‘the idea of making books available online is not new, but this plan represents an enormous shift in scale, so enormous that if it is carried out successfully, it may redefine the nature of the Internet and the university.’’ Working with big libraries— Stanford, Oxford, the University of Michigan, Harvard and the New York Public Library—Google began scanning truckloads of books in 2005. Yet the initiative did not look so good to everyone. Book publishers believed that Google Books, which officially launched at the Frankfurt Book Fair in 2004, infringed on copyright. Google aimed to scan all books, including those that were out-of-print but still under copyright. In 2005, the Association of American Publishers and the Authors Guild sued Google for copyright infringement. Roberts

More Than Just Access: Delivering on a Network-Enabled Literature

By any measure it has been a huge year for the open-access movement. At the beginning of the year, it looked possible that the public access policy of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) might be rolled back by the Research Works Act, a legislative attempt supported by Elsevier and the Association of American Publishers to make such policies illegal [1]. But as we move towards year's end, the momentum behind open access looks unstoppable with the announcement of major policy initiatives in the United States, the European Union, Denmark, and the United Kingdom (see Table 1). Nevertheless, there is still much to be done and the challenges remain large, but the remaining questions are largely ones of implementation, not principle.

Learn to Love the DOI

Learn to Love the DOI

GOOGLE AND THE PROPER ANTITRUST SCRUTINY OF ORPHAN BOOKS

We examine the consumer-welfare implications of Google’s project to scan a large proportion of the world’s books into digital form and to make these works accessible to consumers through Google Book Search (GBS). In response to a class action alleging copyright infringement, Google has agreed to a settlement with the plaintiffs, which include the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers. A federal district court must approve the settlement for it to take effect. Various individuals and organizations have advocated modification or rejection of the settlement, based in part on concerns regarding Google’s claimed ability to exercise market power. The Antitrust Division has confirmed that it is investigating the settlement. We address concerns of Professor Randal Picker and others, especially concerns over the increased access to “orphan books,” which are books that retain their copyright but for which the copyright holders are unknown or cannot be found. The increased accessibility of orphan books under GBS involves the creation of a new product, which entails large gains in consumer welfare. We consider it unlikely that Google could exercise market power over orphan books. We consider it remote that the static efficiency losses claimed by critics of the settlement could outweigh the consumer welfare gains from the creation of a valuable new service for expanding access to orphan books. We therefore conclude that neither antitrust intervention nor price regulation of access to orphan books under GBS would be justified on economic grounds. JEL: K20; K21; L40; L41; L50; O34

Googling the Archives: Ideas from the Google Books Settlement on Solving Orphan Works Issues in Digital Access Projects

Many large scale digital archive access projects, whether undertaken by libraries, cultural institutions, commercial enterprises, research institutions or interest groups, struggle with orphan works and other copyright clearance issues. Under the default ‘opt in’ system prevailing under the Berne copyright treaty framework, each copyright owner must be located and give permission before their material can be digitised and made available for online uses. This imposes significant transaction costs and legal risks, and the public interest in access to cultural material is compromised. Various legislative solutions have been proposed, particularly in relation to orphan works, but no comprehensive solution has emerged. Legal developments around Google’s activities in pursuit of its 'Library Project' now offer new ideas. The Google Books Settlement is the provisional settlement of copyright infringement action brought against Google by the American Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers. The case concerned the legality of the Library Project through which Google has digitised millions of “archival”, or out of print, books and made them searchable online. Google’s controversial defence to copyright infringement is that its actions constitute fair use under US copyright law. The settlement is not yet judicially approved and fairness hearings are set for October 2009. However, if approved it will be ground-breaking. It achieves, via class action rules, a rule switch from opt in to opt out, creating a unique safe harbour for Google to commercially exploit millions of books without first searching for owners and seeking their individual permissions. In practical terms, it will vastly increase digital access to in copyright, out of print books. This paper considers whether legislative reform based roughly on this model could be applied to other digital access projects seeking to unlock cultural archival material.

<i>From Higher Aims to Hired Hands: The Social Transformation of American Business Schools</i> (review)

Reviewed by: From Higher Aims to Hired Hands: The Social Transformation of American Business Schools Kevin T. Leicht From Higher Aims to Hired Hands: The Social Transformation of American Business Schools, by Rakesh Khurana. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007. 543 pp. $35.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-691-12020-1. American business schools are in an existential crisis. From the corporate scandals of the last 10 years, to the mercenary role of executive MBA programs, to the guru worship of corporate CEOs and others, to the variable quality of students and the doubtful connections between business school faculty and management practice, it is difficult to think of what else could go wrong with the American business school in the new century. Rakesh Khurana’s outstanding book provides us with a theoretically sophisticated and sympathetic history of the American business school that explains in very convincing fashion how we got here and what (possibly) the future holds. From Higher Aims to Hired Hands won the 2007 Best Professional/Scholarly Publishing Book in Business, Finance and Management from the Association of American Publishers, and it is very easy to see why. The major theme of the book is that business education began as a professional project for a rising managerial class created by twentieth-century industrial capitalism. Professionalized managers were supposed to maintain U.S. industrial competitiveness, win the Cold War, and produce a professional class of managers with a combination of technical expertise, human resource experience, and a broad understanding of the relationship between business leadership and the central dilemmas facing twentieth-century American society. Business schools sought to tie their role as producers of future leaders to the big issues that motivated university study and research. They aspired to be professional schools following the models of medicine and law. But a funny thing happened on the way to the professional forum—the great foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie) provided millions of dollars in funding to reform business school education after World War II. Foundation reports called for greater disciplinary rigor, greater emphasis on quantitative research among faculty, more rigorous selection of students, and systematic training in the foundational disciplines of psychology, sociology, economics, statistics, and organizational behavior. The purpose of this focus was to improve the overall intellectual quality of business education, making it more on par with the activities of the rest of the university. In practice, this handed disciplinary control of business school curricula to economists, de-emphasizing case studies, managerial practice, human relations, and soft managerial skills. Unfortunately for the rest of us, the rise of economics as the disciplinary center for business school curriculum dovetailed almost exactly with the switch from industrial to finance capitalism. The new and hip place to be as an enterprising young MBA was the consulting firm or the private hedge fund. For business educators, these developments produced the ultimate in organizational contradictions in agency theory. Agency theory takes the would-be professional managers that the pre-War business school idealized and turns them into opportunistic “agents” seeking to dupe the Jesus-like “principals” out of their [End Page 480] hard-earned investment dollars. The purpose of business education shifted to controlling these potential deviants who sought to destroy shareholder value, completely de-legitimating the original professional project advanced by the founders of University-based business education in the first place. In Khurama’s mind, the seriously harmful results of these long-term developments are present for all to see. Business students became obsessed with making more and faster money. Agency theory’s description of opportunistic self-interested behavior turned an unfortunate deviant condition into an inevitability that actually encouraged business students to behave in the very fashion agency theory described. In the process, the American business school became a place to network among students aspiring to join the new American wealthy, where what one learns is replaced by alumni networking, “customer satisfaction”, and returns on educational investment measured in hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is a powerful, compelling, and well-researched narrative. It serves as a useful complement to Jacob Mintzberg’s discussions of the state of business management education (in Managers, Not MBAs, for example). Far from a...

Book Review: The Sun Kings: The Unexpected Tragedy of Richard Carrington and the Tale of How Modern Astronomy Began

Book Review: <i>The Sun Kings: The Unexpected Tragedy of Richard Carrington and the Tale of How Modern Astronomy Began</i>

Association of American Publishers: Handbook on Book Paper and the Environment

Association of American Publishers: Handbook on Book Paper and the Environment

The American Chemical Society and Open Access.

The article focuses on the opposition of the American Chemical Society (ACT) to Open Access (OA) publishing. It says that ACS and other members of the Association of American Publishers (AAP) hired Eric Dezenhall to attack OA movement who eventually founded the Partnership for Research Integrity in Science and Medicine (PRISM). This group has made claims against OA, such as it undermines the peer review process. The author remarks that the ACS should stop getting advice from public relation (PR) flacks if it wants to be a party to OA discussions.

Progress toward Public Access to Science

Progress toward Public Access to Science

Public-Access Backlash

Opponents of a new congressional rule that orders the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) to post online copies of papers it funds are questioning the legality of the order. Buried in a spending bill ( Science , 4 January, p. [18][1]), the directive asks NIH to make mandatory an existing policy, mostly ignored, that asks grantees to submit copies of their peer-reviewed, accepted manuscripts to NIH for release within 12 months after publication. Last week, the Association of American Publishers (AAP) complained that the new policy “undermines” publisher copyright and is “inconsistent” with U.S. intellectual property laws. Open-access advocates support the new law because it gives taxpayers access to government-funded research. AAP's Allan Adler says he's waiting to see how NIH will implement the law. But at minimum, AAP wants NIH to get public input in a formal rulemaking. In a statement, NIH said that “the law regarding a mandatory policy and copyright is clear.” The agency is expected to announce its plan as soon as next week. [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.319.5859.18

Bending the Truth with a PRISM

![][1] ©cartoonbank.com. All Rights Reserved. The Association of American Publishers (AAP) recently launched a website, entitled The Partnership for Research Integrity in Science & Medicine (PRISM; www .prismcoalition.com). The partnership was created to lobby against the Federal

Open Access & ecancermedicalscience.

Open Access (OA), made possible by the advent of the internet, is immediate, free and unrestricted online access to scholarly material; primarily peer-reviewed research articles in journals. This can be read, downloaded, copied, distributed, and used (with attribution) in any way. Promoted by groups such as Public Library of Science (PLOS) and the Max Planck Institute, the debate over its benefits has also recently been taken up by PRISM, the Partnership for Research Integrity in Science & Medicine. It is a group of scientific and medical activists who are fighting against OA for research articles. They claim that by keeping research closed to the public they can “preserve the integrity of America’s scholarly research”. A visit to the website http://www.prismcoalition.org/ reveals the true nature of their argument. The site amounts to an anti-OA forum, aimed at counteracting the accelerating growth of OA. The people behind PRISM, the Association of American Publishers (AAP) originally stated that they are against OA because it: “undermines the peer review process.” “opens the door to scientific censorship”. (They failed to explain how making research publications freely accessible will lead to censorship) “undermines the reasonable protections of copyright holders.” Not all the American publishing companies were in agreement, however. Mike Rossner, Executive Director of Rockefeller University Press, wrote to the AAP stating that they strongly disagree with the views presented on the PRISM website. His views were echoed by the Association of Research Libraries and many commentators online. The backlash surrounding PRISM’s original statement resulted in an update of the site, with a more measured tone on the front page, including the deletion of the statement regarding scientific censorship. There is still no mention of those members of the AAP who disagreed with PRISM. PRISM’s ‘pit-bull’ PR tactics are unlikely to win them any friends. In taking such an aggressive stance they may well alienate those who have agreed, at least in part, with their criticisms. Is it the last gasp from publishers who refuse to do what is the right thing for science and society? (I.e. open up their publications to those who paid for the original research, namely the public). Unlike the pro-OA lobby, which has a huge and growing public support base worldwide, the anti-OA lobby has neither public support, nor any ethical or practical case with which to build it on. The arrival of ecancermedicalscience has not exactly been welcomed with open arms by print publishers, but then, it’s not-for-profit, and science publishing stands for very substantial profit.

Real and Imagined Threats to the Rule of Law: On Brian Tamanaha's Law as a Means to an End

This is a review of Professor Brian Tamanaha's Law as a Means to an End. The book, which was published in 2006 by Cambridge University Press, received rave reviews and was selected in 2007 for special honor by the Association of American Publishers. The article explains Tamanaha's thesis, and subjects it to critical analysis. It concludes that the thesis is wrong, and that it is in conflict with the lessons of the most famous debate in modern jurisprudence - that between H.L.A Hart and Lon Fuller. The article goes on to argue that Tamanaha's view of proper legal interpretation is in fact no different than that of his book's archenemy, Richard Posner's brand of legal pragmatism.

The Jewish Century by Yuri s&gt; Slezkine (review)

REVIEWS 349 Slezkine, Yuri. TheJewishCentu?y. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, and Oxford, 2004. x + 438 pp. Notes. Index. Ci8.95. YURISLEZKINEhas alreadywon recognitionwith his monographArctic Mirrors: RussiaandtheSmallPeoples of theNorth(Ithaca, NY, I and two co-edited volumes. His latest book, TheJewishCentugy, immediatelystimulatedenergetic critical debate for its provocative thesis, sweeping narrative of twentiethcentury history, bold statements and controversial conclusions. The book was awardedprizes by the Associationof American Publishers(2004) and the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies (2005). In his introduction,Slezkineposits that the Modern Age is theJewish Age, while the twentieth century,as the culminationof modernity,is a particularly Jewish century. For Slezkine, Modernity entails, among other things, being 'urban,mobile, literate, articulate, [...] physicallyfastidious,and occupationally flexible' (p. I), all ostensiblytraditionalJewish qualities.The Jew, therefore , becomes the ideal prototype of modern man. Slezkine thus reversesthe conventional metaphor, expressed so eloquently particularlyby Tsvetaeva, casting Jews as eternal misfits, by highlighting the traits that make Jews strikinglyrepresentativeof contemporarysocieties. Many interpretive histories, especially those of Russia, have employed binary oppositions to flesh out the contrasting tendencies in the society they describe (e.g.James H. Billington's TheIconandtheAxe,London, I966). Slezkine drawsupon Greekmythology to illuminatehis viewpoint, classifying people as either Apollonians or Mercurians.As opposed to the conventional associationof Apollo with the Sun and the arts,it is thisdivinity'sarchaicfunction as the patron of agriculturethat is highlightedin his book. Apollonians, therefore, are settled, food-producing societies of farmers, herdsmen and warriors.Apollo is contrasted to Mercury, the god of trade and boundarycrossing ,while 'Mercurians'are entrepreneurialnomads who provide services for Apolloniansand engage in occupationsdeemed 'unclean',includingbanking and medicine. WhileJews clearlyfit the Mercurianprofile,theirnomadic, service-orientedlot is in no way unique, and Slezkine compares their social position to that ofJains, Gypsies, or overseasChinese. Having thus outlined his perspective,Slezkinenarrowshis focus to Russian Jews, whose story he traces from the Pale of Settlement through post-Soviet oligarchs. Here, Sholem-Alecheim's TevyetheMilkmanis brought to bear: just as Tevye's daughters break out of the traditional Pale environment to join revolutionarymovements or marry gentiles so, according to Slezkine's argument,did theJews leave the Pale of Settlement to embarkon one of the three 'messianicpilgrimages':to Palestine, to America, or, by embracing the Bolshevik Revolution, into Soviet urban life. Slezkine follows the imaginary descendents of Tevye's daughtersas they move through the Jewish century'. The most intriguingaccount in the book is that of the SovietJews. Slezkine presentsremarkabledata onJewish overrepresentationin the Revolution, the highest echelons of Soviet bureaucracy,and also in the secretpolice and gulag guards.Jewish allegiance to the Bolshevikcause is explained, predictably,by 'Mercurian'qualities, the fact that the Jews were not attached to the tsarist regime, and were keen to replace the Pale with a differentsociety. Another related issue thoroughly explored is the nature of Stalinist purges. Thus, 350 SEER, 84, 2, 2006 Slezkine convincingly argues that the Jews were in no way a target of the purgesof I937,and theirprominence among the repressedis simplya resultof the significantJewish contingent among the Bolshevik old guard. Slezkine traces the roots of state-sponsoredanti-Semitism to the immediate pre-war years, when Stalin sought to win over Hitler by imitating his racial politics. During World War Two, paradoxically, the Nazis's anti-Semitic ideology spilled over into the Soviet occupied areas, which preparedthe wide popular base for post-war anti-Jewishcampaigns. Slezkine sums up the Soviet period as the rise and fall of the Jews, whose new 'golden calf (the Revolution) propelled them to the heights of power and eventuallyalmost crushed them. The Russian-JewishRevolution aside, the twentieth century is proclaimed theJewish century for several additionalreasons:this is the age of Marxism, Freudianism, capitalism, anti-Semitism (or, shall we add, the culmination thereof in the Holocaust), and American Liberalism, and Slezkine rightly seesJews at the inception or at the centre of all of these diversephenomena. This is the Jewish century also because of the rebirth, after a hiatus of two millennia, of theJewish state, and Slezkine does in fact turn his attention to Israel toward the end of the book. His attention is cursorythough, ignoring any specifics or complexities of the Middle Eastern context and repeating a few unflatteringbut 'politicallycorrect' opinions encountered frequentlyin the Westernpress...