From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 18:51:44 -0700

I didn't read it that way, Anthony.  I think the point rather is that
Anthrosource was with a not-for-profit unit of a university and was
moved by the society to WileyBlackwell (it may have been before the
Blackwell acquisition; I'm not sure).  So if someone is complaining
about Wiley's trading practices, why not protest when the project was
taken away from the university press?

BTW, Wiley is  great publisher and does a great job.  But that's not
what's at issue here.  The question is the apparent contradiction
between declared philosophical positions and actions on the part of
some society publishers.

Of course, the director of Columbia University Press can speak for
himself and may inform this list that I have it all wrong!

Joe Esposito

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 4:07 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 09:12:05 +0100
>
> This is an odd intervention. Is the director of Columbia suggesting
> (presumably out of collegiate feeling because it will be difficult to get
> the evidence) that Wiley do a worse job as a publishing partner than
> University of California press?
>
> Anthony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Jordan <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 19:13:49 -0400
>
> It's a good question.  I asked it recently of an anthropologist who
> complained about Wiley's handling of his association's journals.
> Where were they when their association decided to move the journals
> from the University of California Press?
>
> James D. Jordan
> President and Director
> Columbia University Press
> New York, NY 10023
> www.cup.columbia.edu
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 4:59 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:46:49 -0500
> >
> > It does seem odd that societies would outsource their journal
> > publishing to large commercial publishers because they can be assured
> > in advance (1) that the prices will go way up,  (2) fewer individuals
> > will be able to afford to subscribe to them, and (3) any profits made
> > will not redound to the benefit of academic research since they will
> > go to pay shareholders or be used to grow the size of the company
> > further so as to  increase its market share.  Why do scholars complain
> > about commercial journal practices and then turn around and allow
> > their societies to help those companies profit even further at the
> > expense of academe?
> >
> > Sandy Thatcher