From: Wilhelmina Randtke <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 23:01:42 -0500 Publishers, does the availability of the dissertation affect whether or not there's a market for the book? -Wilhelmina Randtke On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 9:21 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > From: Sean Andrews <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:12:59 -0500 > > I agree that education on these matters is valuable - and would be > interested to hear from publishers if having a digital version of the > dissertation somehow affects the market for the book. But otherwise, > this seems to be a non-issue, at least in terms of the legal concerns. > If this person doesn't want his dissertation sold through third party > retailers, he can write ProQuest and they will remove it. > > http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/tpd_retailers.shtml > > If it is on Barnes and Noble illegally, he can contact them with a > DMCA takedown notice: > > http://www.barnesandnoble.com/include/terms_of_use.asp > > Of course, if a digital edition exists in the ProQuest database, then > it might be easier to redistribute it illegally (I found my 2009 > dissertation through some illegal seller a few months ago - can't find > the link now.) But this has nothing to do the legal code: just the > software code. > > And the only other option is to (attempt to) prevent it from being > digitally distributed at all. Since there are likely some legitimate > publishers out there - and certainly many researchers - who read > through dissertations to find possible books (maybe even more now that > they publish fewer books and want to be discerning) it seems > counterproductive to act like we live in a print only world. As many > authors of works supposedly available only in print, who can likely > find scanned pdfs of their work relatively easily online, this is head > in the sand behavior. Piracy may be a problem, but if demand exists, > there is little you can do to absolutely prevent the illicit > distribution of your dissertation - except perhaps convince a major UP > to print it, based on the obvious interest shown in the rough cut: > then you'll have their legal department's muscle. Or might. > > I'd also point out that, for me, even though I was interested in > digital distribution anyway (my dissertation being about IPR), the > economics of the digital deposit for ProQuest were pretty compelling. > If I had gone the "traditional" route, I would have to supply both my > library AND ProQuest with a copy of the dissertation (all 450+ pages) > on that fancy cotton paper. I don't remember the exact price, but I > think it would have been an extra $100 or so to file in the > "traditional" option. As it was, I sent ProQuest a CD-rom with the > file. Now they have an FTP site set up to upload it directly. This > makes the most sense anyway as their website says the only thing they > do with the print copy is scan it in order to upload it. > > On the flip side, I have read through several very interesting > dissertations complements of the ProQuest arrangement. Most of these > will likely not end up as books - or at least they haven't in the last > 4-5 years. For instance, though he has a PhD in economics from > University of Illinois, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa has never > published a book on his theories or perspectives on economics. But > you can find a deposit of his dissertation on the topic in the UMI > database. > > Likewise, and more topically, Sharon Farb has an excellent First > Monday piece on library stewardship and the licensing of electronic > resources. > > http://www.firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/1364/1283 > > It is based on a much longer dissertation writeup of her surveys of > librarians. Since she's not published the latter in a book form, the > best way to see the more extensive study is via the ProQuest/UMI > database. I suppose there might be IR versions, and they might even > have it on a website somewhere, but this particular database is a > good, general discovery window (and one that, as far as I can tell, is > only accessible via an institutional subscription.) > > The alternative is that these aren't even filed with UMI, which would > make it impossible to have the post-publication peer review that is > central to scholarly communication. I have encountered several such > cases - especially among older scholars in my field who claim that it > is too embarrassing to have their dissertation available for all to > read - even through the old, onerous process Dr. O'Donnell discusses. > I have my own opinions on this matter, I'll leave it for others to > decide whether this is a legitimate claim - or if it should make them > immune from the evolving scholarly conversation in which they claim to > otherwise participate. > > It's a brave new world, but this particular issue seems the least of > our worries. > > Sean Andrews > > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:20 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > > From: Jim O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]> > > Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 20:10:26 -0700 > > > > A Cautionary Tale" > > > > http://chronicle.com/article/Dissertation-for-Sale-A/132401/ > > > > This article from CHE reports a recent Ph.D.'s startled experience > of finding that because he checked a box without thinking on the > form with which he deposited his dissertation with ProQuest, his > > dissertation was now available for sale for $32 on the Nook reader. > > He objects, I think rightly, and I hope he can reverse the > > box-checking. > > > > But what has changed is interesting. It was always possible to > obtain some or all of most dissertations by writing away to Ann > Arbor. But the process was cumbersome. Intellectual access > to the existence of a dissertation came through the indices to > the bound volumes of *Dissertation Abstracts*; ordering the product > was done by hand and surface post; and the product was at best > a grainy print from a microfilm of a typescript. Few bothered. > > > > Now it is a matter of femtoseconds for the metadata about the > > dissertation to be searched by robots; a few more femtoseconds to > > create the availability in a given format; and the product available > > is searchable, handsome, and easily gotten. It's all gotten easier. > > > > And of course the original notion of a dissertation was that it was a > > published work of scholarship; the deposit of dissertation was > > technically "publication" (microfilm at Ann Arbor replaced the old > > practice of the privately printed dissertation paid for by the > > candidate), but I dare say few if any dissertation-submitters today > > think of the deposit as publication in any meaningful sense. What > to do? At a minimum, candidates could use better information about > their options and the consequences of their options. > > > > Jim O'Donnell > > Georgetown University