Post ATghilAPOnQ0ZBSk7c by kfogel@kfogel.org
(DIR) More posts by kfogel@kfogel.org
(DIR) Post #ATbuaa3EGgsfGkh8wC by lakens@mastodon.social
2023-03-14T14:18:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Just got a request from a publisher (Routledge) to publish a book with them. I of course said no. Academics should not publish books with commercial publishers,. You can nowadays put your book online with bookdown and R and make the content accessible for free. Their main selling point was "The book will be published by a reputable academic publisher". Sorry, but I do not play the prestige game.
(DIR) Post #ATbuaaojQ4sVe4v4ym by kfogel@kfogel.org
2023-03-14T15:32:01.026148Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lakens Sounds like two different issues?It would be fine to publish a book with a commercial publisher if that book were still released under a free (libre) license. In other wrds, if your requirement is that the content be free, then that just becomes a negotiating point with a publisher. If they can publish it while respecting those freedoms, then great. You could still put it online with bookdown and R, or however you want.And of course, unless you're using a restrictive license, Routledge *could* publish it anyway, with or without your approval, as long as they abide by the license.(This isn't just theoretical, by the way. I did this, with a different publisher, and am very happy with the results. Among other things: because the text was freely available online, the book got translated into several other languages.)
(DIR) Post #ATghikdnM3KYw2ChHs by lakens@mastodon.social
2023-03-14T15:53:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@kfogel Open access can be negotiated indeed. But what is then the added benefit (and what the cost) of having a publisher?
(DIR) Post #ATghilAPOnQ0ZBSk7c by kfogel@kfogel.org
2023-03-16T23:01:24.348486Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lakens Well, that depends on what the publisher is offering to do. The services of their editor, and creation and distribution of treeware copies (using the publisher's distribution network, which is something I don't have) -- those were the main things in it for me. There was no cost to me.But these answers might be different for different publishers anyway. My main point is just that there's no reason to make a blanket recommendation that "academics should not publish books with commercial publishers". I think the blanket recommendation to make, if any, is "people shouldn't agree to monopolistic licenses". As long as one isn't giving someone else the power to restrict the distribution of one's work, then what harm is there to worry about?
(DIR) Post #ATiX2M2rneYhGUznV2 by lakens@mastodon.social
2023-03-17T05:45:01Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@kfogel I agree it is fine to use a publishers as a sort of on demand paper printing service. One would need to make sure libraries are not tricked to buy books that are free online, bit otherwise this is fine and not what I responded against. I could have been more precise: Do not publish with commerical publishers unless your book is available for free and there is no great additional time investment in the paper copy.
(DIR) Post #ATiXYVRwMzoxhP3SmO by kfogel@kfogel.org
2023-03-17T20:16:57.055929Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lakens Understood. I got a lot more than that from my publisher, for what it's worth. So I would say that rather than making sure there is no great additional time investment in the paper copy, one should simply make sure that whatever investment one puts in results in corresponding benefit(s) -- i.e., that the investment is worth it. Sometimes it will be, and sometimes it won't.I agree with you that there is no magical thing that automatically comes from publishing with a treeware publisher. One's book is still a book, whether or not a publisher (or any other organization) has blessed it. But there can be some real benefits, so it shouldn't be ruled out prematurely.