From: Mary Summerfield <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:46:11 -0700

Most of the revenue from a book sale does not "go to" the publisher as
in stay there as profit (which this message suggests in comparing it
to the royalty to the author).  It goes to wholesalers, retailers,
printers, and others in the chain of producing and distributing the
book.  The share staying with the publisher (especially a scholarly
publisher) is very small.  A small book publisher is luck to break
even on its operations.

Mary Summerfield

Publications Business Development Manager
SPIE
[log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
From: Ari Belenkiy <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 23:04:01 -0700

But David, Finch made it clear that Universities lack the means for
distribution of its faculty's works.

This is the vocation of publishers who reap the dividends.

That's why the authors of the books receive only 10% of revenue - the
rest goes to a publisher.

Ari Belenkiy
Richmond BC


On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 7:04 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: David Prosser <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:58:54 +0100
>
> Joe
>
> Research university X already gives away its intellectual property and
> then spends much more than non-research universities in buying access
> to the intellectual property of other research universities.  Where's
> the strategic thinking there?
>
> And of course, a lot of the research done isn't paid for by the
> universities themselves - it's paid for by research funders such as
> NIH in the US and the Research Councils in the UK.  For the NIH to
> ensure that NIH-funded researcher in University N has access to
> research outputs generated by NIH-funded researcher at University M
> looks to me the epitome of strategic thinking.
>
> David