LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 8 Jul 2012 12:46:28 -0400
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1168 bytes) , text/html (1755 bytes)
From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 10:37:08 -0500

No commercial publisher has a faculty editorial board that is given the
responsibility of reviewing readers' reports and approving publication of
every book proposed by the publishing staff. That is what I meant by
"quality control," Rick, and it is indeed unique to university presses and
is a requirement of their membership in the AAUP.

Sandy Thatcher


At 2:48 AM -0400 7/4/12, LIBLICENSE wrote:

> From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 15:46:32 +0000
>
>  All
>> university presses are mandated to have quality control procedures in
>> place for their operations. That is what makes them university
>> presses.
>>
>
> Er, no. What makes them university presses is the fact that they're owned
> and run by universities and call themselves university presses. If having
> "quality control procedures in place for their operations" made a
> publisher a university press, then by that definition most (if not all)
> trade publishers would be university presses.
>
> --
> Rick Anderson
> Acting Dean, J. Willard Marriott Library
> University of Utah
> [log in to unmask]


ATOM RSS1 RSS2