Technology Matters: Internet book piracy - author's view

After the American Century

The thing about being robbed in cyberspace is that you don't even notice. Last year when someone got hold of the number on one of my credit cards  and began spending thousands of my dollars in Florida, I felt and heard nothing for weeks. If someone had robbed me on the street, I certainly would have noticed. But I have not been on the streets of Florida for decades. 

This week I discovered that many different people have been stealing, almost certainly for several years, my book Technology Matters by downloading it for free from the Internet. I stumbled across one site giving it away, notified the publisher, and it was taken off. But then I decided actually to search and see if there were others. I found out that there were at least 8 other sites where the book could also be downloaded for free.

But was this really free? The  book can be purchased on Amazon for $10.06 brand new. It is also for sale as a Kindle edition for about the same price. So this is not at all an expensive book. My publisher has made a great effort to make it available at a reasonable cost. Were someone to download it for free and print out the 296 pages, how much would they save? Assuming two pages on a sheet, these pirates need to print 148 pages, plus the cover. Then it would be wise to bind the whole thing together in some way. And do not forget the cost of the ink and electricity and the wear and tear on the printer. There may be a small savings, but the result is not nearly as nice, as lightweight, or as handy to use as a bound book.

Aside from the economics of this theft, there is the effect on publishing. The more people download illegally, the fewer books the publishers sell, and in fact the fewer books they can afford to publish. The sort of person who wants to read Technology Matters is someone who would like publishers to survive and to bring out a wide variety of academic titles.

Instead of supporting the authors, the publishing industry, and the culture of learning, the Internet downloading pirate is choosing to spend money on printers, ink, electricity, and paper.

Alternately, the thief can read the book in electronic form, but it was not formatted for that medium, and based on my own experience of reading PDF files on both an Ipad and Kindle, this is an awkward business. Try jumping to the index to check something and finding your way back, for example. Try to go look at the footnotes (usually at the end) out of curiosity. Not easy.

Finally, as an author who spent three years researching and writing a book that people are stealing from me, I must point out that royalties are never large enough to cover the costs of going to the archives and libraries, much less provide a plausible hourly wage. As a rational economic man, if sales fall because my work is stolen digitally, I should stop writing books altogether. There is no economic incentive. Internet book piracy can only discourage writers from writing and publishers from publishing.

Stealing books electronically may seem like getting something for nothing. But it takes from some and gives to others. Seen in a larger perspective, there is no free lunch. If this trend accelerates, we will eventually have no more books, but instead printers, copy machines, and blank paper that no one wants to write on,

Who Should Be Paid for Danish Research?

After the American Century

The Danish universities are moving to what labor historians would call a "piece rate system." That is, money for research will be paid not on the basis of weeks or months devoted to research, but rather on the basis of how many items are produced.

A new form of exploitation may emerge in this system. Exploitation is a strong word, so let me be clear what I mean by it. Workers are exploited if another person or institution is paid for their work. If I build a wall, and someone else, not me, gets paid for my work, that is exploitation.

Is something akin to this happening in Danish universities? Quite possibly. Every university has a number of recent PhDs who have completed their studies and who teach part time. (In many cases they are paid only as teaching assistants, which I think should not be allowed. Once you have a PhD, the proper title and pay scale should be that of external lecturer.) My concern is that these recent PhDs do not have research appointments. They only are paid, and rather badly, for their teaching. Nevertheless, they do their best to publish articles and books, for that is the surest path to full-time employment.

Who gets financial credit for a recent PhD's publications? I have asked around, and it seems that these new PhDs are encouraged to register their work, i.e. put it into each university's database. The system's acronym is, ironically enough, PURE. But there is nothing "pure" about hiring people only for their teaching and then including their research in the university's productivity. Why should the university be paid for publications by people whom it does not employ to do research? How would you feel if, outside your regular job, you painted a picture or renovated a car, and then suddenly your employer was able to send a bill to the government for that work, while you got nothing?

Is this happening? I fear it is. I know for certain that when university departments undergo accreditation reviews, the publications of recent PhDs at times are included in the statistics. Admittedly, this is a gray area, because typically these publications are portions of a PhD thesis, rewritten into articles. And the PhD thesis was written while on a research appointment. Nevertheless, it does not feel entirely right or fair. And for how many years can a university claim the publications of its recent PhDs?

Note too that retired faculty also may continue to publish. Can or should the Danish universities be paid for this work, which again they do not support financially?

There is a simple solution to this problem. Pay the writer for a publication directly unless he or she has a university research contract. This would mean that if a person does not have university employment, they could still be rewarded. Why should the government pay the university for the completion of research it did not support? Why should a scholarly publication by a private individual be worth nothing, if a publication produced by a university employee automatically releases funding?

To see the absurdity, translate this into agricultural terms. Imagine that there are university farmers who are paid for the crops they grow. Imagine that there are private farmers who are paid nothing for their crops. And imagine that university farmers find ways to claim the production of the private farmers, in order to get a completely unearned additional subsidy. Who would think that a fair policy?

The Danish universities do not seem to have quite reached this form of exploitation, but they appear to be headed that way. No one consciously planned this situation, which rather seems to be an unintended outcome. But it has dire consequences. If such a system is allowed to flourish, then universities will profit if they can produce many PhDs, keep them around as poorly paid part-time teachers, and claim credit for the research they do on their own. This is presumably not what the government wanted to do by introducing a piece-rate system.

[For critique of the new bibliometric system itself, see March 21, 2009
The Bureaucratic Dream of Quantifying Research Results

Americans Are Reading More

After the American Century

A new Census study revealed that more Americans are reading fiction and poetry than they were in 2002, the first time that number has gone up in decades. Slightly more than half of all adults read a literary work last year, though unfortunately the study did not differentiate between those who read just a single short story and those who read for several hours every day.

Men still read considerably less than women, but even they were reading a bit more. Given the competition with TV, film, computing, and the vast leisure industry, any gain is worth celebrating. As an author, I have worried that this might be the last generation that really reads books.

But the celebrating should be muted. The Association of American Publishers reported sales down more than 3% for 2008, wiping out a corresponding gain from 2007. If people are reading more, they may be borrowing books from libraries or friends rather than buying them. Compared to the huge losses in many industries, the bankruptcies, the foreclosures, and the rising unemployment rate, however, a 3% fall seems like nothing at all.

E-books still are a tiny segment of the market, less than 1%, though Amazon has made an effort to develop this area, selling its own special reader, The Kindle. Waiting lists are long for that device, however Meanwhile, many classic texts are available on-line for free, and to the extent that people go to sites like Bartleby and get their literature there, they will not be counted.

Overall, publishing is doing better than the music industry, which has seen sales of CDs decline drastically, by 45% since 2000. On-line sales have increased, but not as rapidly, so there is shortfall that is hurting the big music companies. Overall, the book publishers seem to be in a more stable situation. Thus it turns out my decision not to seek stardom in rock star back in the 1960s has finally been vindicated.