Re: Institutional subscription question

[Bernd-Christoph_Kaemper? <bernd-christoph.kaemper@ub.uni-stuttgart.de>]

John Cox' mentioning of Carfax brought to my mind that there are 
quite a number of journals which probably only survive because of 
the few libraries which can afford comprehesive collections in 
some subject or are funded to do so and will pay even the most 
outrageous prices, plus the network of editors, advisory board 
members etc. that receive the journal for free and guarantee at 
least a limited availability of the journal at universities 
throughout the world. A prime example of this are the former 
Gordon & Breach Journals that have been taken over by Taylor & 
Francis without price reduction (even if their ridiculous price 
increases did not continue as before). In such situation, we have 
no problem in accepting donations by an editorial or advisory 
board member that happens to be associated to our site. However, 
such donations always occur with a time delay of at least a year, 
more often two years, therefore they are no replacement for 
regular subscriptions, which we could not afford anyway (because 
the publisher has priced itself out of the market long ago). For 
practical reasons alone we would never contemplate to substitute 
a regular subs against a donated one, but we won't turn off a 
donation. As to the question whether it is legal or not, it all 
depends on the contract the professor has signed, and it is his 
risk not ours as libraries. We also have an analogue of the first 
sale doctrine in European copyright law as well. And if back 
issue sales are legitimate, then back issue donations to get rid 
of those old volumes are also. To speak of theft here, is a 
perversion of the law, and nothing than the usual tactics of 
intimidation and wishful thinking.

As to your mentioning the personal subscription fraud issues this 
is an entirely different issue, as it concerned the clearly 
fraudulent practice of agencies (black sheep among subscriptions 
agents) not end customers buying at the personal price and 
selling at the institutional price (or some reduced price to 
undercut legitimate agents sales).

As already mentioned, the case for electronic access is entirely 
different. The first copy doctrine doesn't apply here. Today we 
again have access to the hugely over- priced former Gordon & 
Breach journals (some of them being journals for which T&F itself 
had formerly launched rival journals, like Liquid Crystals for 
Molecular and Liquid Crystals, both of which now coexist and 
probably will do so until the editors-in-chief die out), but not 
because we buy them but because we get them essentially for free 
as part of the Taylor & Francis ST(M) package that is offered as 
an add-on to an institutions portfolio. I think this amply shows 
how absurd some of these cases are. It is for a reason if at many 
institutions the free editorial copies are the only one around. 
And to make one thing perfectly clear: if a professor joins an 
editorial board and recommends a journal for purchase we have to 
ask him to suggest other journals for cancellation, and get his 
colleagues approval or support for that, just like with any other 
journal. Its essentially a null-sum game.

Best regards,
Bernd-Christoph Kaemper, Stuttgart University Library


Universitaetsbibliothek
Universitaet Stuttgart
Holzgartenstrasse 16
70550 Stuttgart

Tel. +49-(0)711-685-64731
      +49-(0)711-685-64731