College and Research Libraries By R A L P H R . S H A W Publication and Distribution of Scientific Literature PUBLICATION i s A TERM t h a t h a s n e v e r a d e q u a t e l y b e e n d e f i n e d . I n s o m e a r e a s of science, s u c h as t a x o n o m y , " f i r s t p u b l i c a t i o n " is a v e r y i m p o r t a n t c o n c e p t — a n d a f u z z y o n e . I n o t h e r a r e a s its defi- n i t i o n a f f e c t s t h e w o r k of s c i e n t i s t s i n m a n y ways. I n essence, p u b l i c a t i o n o r p u b l i s h i n g i n c l u d e s a c o m p l e x , i n t e g r a t e d series of m e c h a n i c a l a n d i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o c e s s e s in- v o l v e d i n t h e s e l e c t i o n , r e p r o d u c t i o n a n d d i s s e m i n a t i o n of m a n u s c r i p t m a t e r i a l . T h e s e processes a r e i n t e r - r e l a t e d a n d i t is n o t h e l p f u l t o c o n c e n t r a t e u n d u l y o n a n y o n e of t h e m . A s i n d i c a t e d i n a r e c e n t e d i t o r i a l i n Science,x t h i s w r i t e r sees n o i n s o l u b l e p r o b l e m s i n t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of s c i e n t i f i c l i t e r a t u r e o r o t h e r s c h o l a r l y b o o k s . If t h e y a r e i m p o r t a n t t o m a n k i n d , t h e n m e a n s f o r t h e i r p u b l i c a t i o n c a n b e f o u n d — a n d , i n f a c t , g e n e r a l l y a r e f o u n d . W h e n w e c o m p l a i n a b o u t t h e s a d p l i g h t of s c h o l a r - ly p u b l i s h i n g w e m a y f o r g e t t h a t some- w h e r e b e t w e e n 100,000 a n d 1,000,000 sci- e n t i f i c a n d t e c h n i c a l b o o k s , a r t i c l e s , re- p o r t s , a n d d o c u m e n t s i s s u e d by g o v e r n - m e n t s a r e p u b l i s h e d a n n u a l l y . I t is i n t h i s r e s p e c t , h o w e v e r , t h a t w e m u s t m a k e s u r e t h a t w e u n d e r s t a n d w h a t w e a r e t a l k i n g a b o u t w h e n w e u s e t h e w o r d p u b l i c a t i o n ; a n d s c i e n t i s t s m a y h a v e t o d o s o m e r e - t h i n k i n g i n t h i s r e g a r d if t h e y t h e m s e l v e s a r e n o t t o p l a c e u n d u e r e s t r i c t i o n s o n d i s s e m i n a t i o n of s c i e n t i f i c i n f o r m a t i o n . F i n e p r i n t i n g , d e s i r a b l e t h o u g h i t is, is n o t a n a b s o l u t e r e q u i s i t e f o r p u b l i c a t i o n . M o v a b l e t y p e is n o t r e q - 1 R. R. Shaw, " P u b l i s h i n g Scientific Books," Science C X X I (1955), 17A. Dr. Shaw is professor, Graduate School of Library Service, Rutgers University. u i s i t e f o r p u b l i c a t i o n . A l l t h a t is r e q u i r e d is t h a t t h e m a n u s c r i p t b e selected for pub- lication, that it be duplicated, in some f o r m , i n n u m b e r s s u f f i c i e n t t o m a k e i t n o r m a l l y a v a i l a b l e t o t h o s e w h o w a n t it, a n d t h a t i t b e distributed. T h u s , t h e re- s t r i c t i o n i m p o s e d b y i n t e r n a t i o n a l r u l e s o n n o m e n c l a t u r e , w h i c h a t l e a s t u n t i l r e c e n t l y d i d n o t r e c o g n i z e as p u b l i s h e d a n y t h i n g i s s u e d i n m i c r o f i l m , m i m e o - g r a p h e d o r s i m i l a r f o r m s , r e g a r d l e s s of t h e n u m b e r of c o p i e s p r o d u c e d a n d dis- t r i b u t e d , is a g o o d e x a m p l e of t h e r e s t r i c - t i o n u p o n p u b l i c a t i o n c a u s e d b y insist- e n c e u p o n a f o r m of p u b l i c a t i o n t h a t is u n e c o n o m i c a l f o r s o m e t y p e s of m a t e r i a l . I t w a s s o m e t i m e b e f o r e t h e w r i t e r r e a l - ized t h a t w h e n a U n i t e d S t a t e s g o v e r n - m e n t i n f o r m a t i o n officer r e f e r s t o " g o v - e r n m e n t p u b l i c a t i o n s , " h e is t a l k i n g a b o u t t h o s e f e w p r i n t e d f r o m m o v a b l e t y p e a t t h e G o v e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g Office i n W a s h i n g t o n , n o t e v e n i n c l u d i n g t h o s e p r i n t e d f r o m m o v a b l e t y p e a t field p r i n t - i n g s t a t i o n s . T h u s , t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D e - p a r t m e n t of A g r i c u l t u r e , f o r e x a m p l e , issues a Monthly List of Publications, w h i c h n o r m a l l y d i s p l a y s s o m e t w e n t y - f i v e t i t l e s p e r m o n t h . W h e n a l l t h e i t e m s sep- a r a t e l y i s s u e d by t h i s d e p a r t m e n t a r e c o u n t e d , h o w e v e r , t h e t o t a l is e i g h t o r t e n t i m e s t h a t n u m b e r , a n d t h e u s e r w h o r e l i e s o n t h i s so-called m o n t h l y list of p u b l i c a t i o n s t o find o u t w h a t t h e U S D A h a s i s s u e d i n h i s field is b a d l y m i s l e d . W i t h o u t m u l t i p l y i n g t h e s e e x a m p l e s f u r t h e r , i t a p p e a r s q u i t e e v i d e n t t h a t t h e r e is n e e d f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n of t h e con- c e p t of p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e i n t e r e s t of t h e a d v a n c e m e n t of science. T h e f o r m s i n w h i c h s c i e n t i f i c i n f o r m a - t i o n m a y c o m m o n l y b e p u b l i s h e d , h e r e r e f e r r i n g t o t e x t u a l f o r m s , a r e t h e b o o k a n d t h e " p a p e r , " w i t h t h e l a t t e r d i v i d e d i n t o f o r m s s u c h as t h e c o n g r e s s o r p e r i o d i - cal a r t i c l e , t h e p a m p h l e t , a n d t h e " r e - p o r t . " A l t h o u g h t h e r e is n o i n v a r i a b l y s o u n d i n t e l l e c t u a l r e a s o n w h y i t s h o u l d b e so, t h e o r d e r g i v e n a b o v e is q u i t e c o m - m o n l y c o n s i d e r e d h i e r a r c h i c a l i n t e r m s of t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e p u b l i c a t i o n , a n d , p e r h a p s b e c a u s e of t h i s s t e r e o t y p e , t h i s o r d e r of levels of w h a t m i g h t b e t e r m e d d i g n i t y - v a l u e is j u s t i f i a b l e m o r e f r e q u e n t - ly t h a n n o t . W h o d o e s n o t t a k e t h e t a s k of w r i t i n g a b o o k m o r e s e r i o u s l y t h a n t h e t a s k of w r i t i n g a s y m p o s i u m p a p e r o r a r e p o r t of a n e x p e r i m e n t ? O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e " p a p e r " is b y f a r t h e m o r e c o m - m o n a n d s p e e d i e r m e t h o d of p u b l i c a t i o n . I n t e r m s of t h e q u a l i t y of s e l e c t i o n , w e n o r m a l l y find a r e l a t i v e l y h i g h o r d e r of s c h o l a r l y c o m p e t e n c e a p p l i e d t o t h e s e l e c t i o n of b o o k s a n d s c h o l a r l y p e r i o d i - cal a r t i c l e s f o r p u b l i c a t i o n . T h i s is n o t i n v a r i a b l y t r u e , h o w e v e r , a n d a s e l f - p u b - l i s h e d b o o k o r a s u b s i d i z e d b o o k m a y w e l l h a v e b e e n j u d g e d by s o m e w h a t d i f - f e r e n t c r i t e r i a t h a n a r e a p p l i e d b y a scien- t i f i c j o u r n a l w h i c h uses a s o p h i s t i c a t e d r e f e r e e i n g s y s t e m . R e p o r t l i t e r a t u r e , i n t h e sense i n w h i c h it is c o m m o n l y u s e d a t p r e s e n t , v a r i e s f r o m a s l i g h t l y s o p h i s t i - c a t e d f o r m of l a b o r a t o r y n o t e b o o k , re- q u i r e d f o r l i a i s o n a m o n g a t e a m of re- s e a r c h e r s i n fifty p l a c e s u n d e r fifty con- t r a c t o r s , t o h i g h l y p o l i s h e d , c r i t i c a l l y s e l e c t e d , c a r e f u l l y e d i t e d m o n o g r a p h s . S e l e c t i o n t h u s v a r i e s w i t h t h e t y p e of p u b l i c a t i o n t h a t is i n t e n d e d t o r e s u l t , w i t h w h o is p a y i n g f o r it, w i t h t h e t y p e of u s e — - a n d , i n e v i t a b l y , i n v a r y i n g d e - grees, w i t h t h e q u a l i t y of r e f e r e e i n g . B e t h a t as it m a y ; a l a r g e p e r c e n t a g e of t h e b o o k s t h a t d o n o t g e t p u b l i s h e d d o n o t g e t p u b l i s h e d b e c a u s e t h e y a r e n o t w o r t h p u b l i s h i n g — a t l e a s t i n t h e j u d g - m e n t of t h o s e w h o d o t h e r e f e r e e i n g . T h i s h a s p r o b a b l y a l w a y s b e e n t r u e , a n d t h e f a c t t h a t it is r e l a t i v e l y easy f o r a p r o s p e c - t i v e p u b l i s h e r t o r e t u r n a b o o k w i t h a r e f e r e n c e t o l i m i t e d m a r k e t o r o t h e r p o - l i t e c i r c u m l o c u t i o n t e n d s t o d i s t o r t t h e p r o p o r t i o n of a l l e g e d l y i m p o r t a n t b o o k s t h a t a r e u n p u b l i s h a b l e . A n d , of c o u r s e , t h e r e m a y a l w a y s b e cases i n w h i c h t h e j u d g m e n t of t h e b e s t of r e f e r e e s w i t h t h e b e s t of i n t e n t i o n s m a y b e e r r o n e o u s . N e v - e r t h e l e s s , as a s p a r e - t i m e p u b l i s h e r i n a s m a l l w a y , t h e w r i t e r c a n t e s t i f y t h a t a v e r y l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m a n u s c r i p t s t h a t r e a c h h i m so o b v i o u s l y h a v e l i t t l e t o c o m m e n d t h e m t h a t t h e y a r e r e j e c t e d o n t h a t g r o u n d . E x c e p t f o r t h e p e r e n n i a l q u a r r e l a b o u t d e l a y i n p u b l i c a t i o n , a n d " p r o m p t n e s s " w h i c h h a s n e v e r b e e n d e f i n e d i n v e r y m e a n i n g f u l t e r m s , t h e r e is r e l a t i v e l y lit- t l e d i f f i c u l t y a b o u t p u b l i s h i n g p e r i o d i c a l a r t i c l e s t h a t m e e t e x a c t i n g l i t e r a r y a n d s c i e n t i f i c s t a n d a r d s . A n u n p u b l i s h e d sur- vey of a c o n s i d e r a b l e p a r t of t h e field of s c i e n c e by t h e N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e F o u n d a - t i o n i n 1954 f o u n d n o e v i d e n c e t h a t exist- e n t j o u r n a l s c o u l d n o t p u b l i s h t h e w o r t h - w h i l e m a t e r i a l t h a t w a s s u b m i t t e d t o t h e m ; a n d a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e s a m e con- c l u s i o n w a s r e a c h e d b y t h e N a t i o n a l R e - s e a r c h C o u n c i l ' s c o n f e r e n c e o n s c i e n t i f i c p u b l i s h i n g a b o u t t w o y e a r s e a r l i e r . So f a r as p e r i o d i c a l p u b l i c a t i o n is c o n c e r n e d t h e p r o b l e m s a p p e a r t o b e c o n c e n t r a t e d a b o u t t h e q u e s t i o n s of a c c e p t a b l e l e n g t h of p a p e r s a n d s u c h h i g h l y c o n t r o v e r s i a l s u b j e c t s as t h e g r o w i n g t e n d e n c y t o c h a r g e t h e a u t h o r ( o r h i s e m p l o y e r ) f o r p a r t o r a l l of t h e cost of p u b l i c a t i o n . T h e r e a p p e a r s t o b e g e n e r a l a g r e e m e n t t h a t i n s o f a r as t h e r e is s e r i o u s d i f f i c u l t y a b o u t p u b l i s h i n g i n t h e sciences it cen- t e r s a b o u t t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of b o o k s . H o w - e v e r , a r e c e n t s p o t c h e c k u n d e r t a k e n b y t h e A m e r i c a n C o u n c i l of L e a r n e d Socie- ties h a s n o t i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e r e is a n y o v e r w h e l m i n g n u m b e r of first-rate u n - p u b l i s h a b l e m a n u s c r i p t s ( i n t h e h u m a n i - ties a t l e a s t ) d e s p i t e t h e f r e q u e n c y a n d w a r m t h w i t h w h i c h t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s of p u b - l i s h i n g i n t h i s field a r e d i s c u s s e d . C O S T S O F P U B L I C A T I O N I n s o f a r as t h e r e a r e r e a l d i f f i c u l t i e s i n p u b l i s h i n g i m p o r t a n t s c i e n t i f i c a n d o t h e r 294 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES scholarly books, these difficulties revolve around the seminal book of limited mar- ket. T h e critical factor in this area is the size of the edition that can be marketed efficiently. T h e most suitable production process does vary with the type of ma- terial involved, with the amount of tabu- lar, notational, pictorial, and pictogram material that must be set. If this were the critical factor, then a simple solution in chemistry, for example, would be to adopt a new notational system such as that of Dyson or Wiswesser, or others, which would bring chemical typesetting into the range of cost of normal typeset- ting. A n d while that would be unconven- tional, this writer would state as a matter of faith that while conventional printed form is preferable, it is not preferable to the point of making publication impos- sible; the only thing we can not afford, whether it be in terms of cash cost or per- missible change in our habits, is to have important contributions unavailable. However, composition cost is only a small part of the total cost. In the case of periodicals of relatively large circula- tion the manufacturing cost may run around 50 per cent of the retail price. In the case of books, particularly scholarly books published in small editions, the manufacturing cost is usually only about one-fourth of the retail price, and the composition cost is only about 40 per cent of the manufacturing cost. In chemical works involving large numbers of struc- tural formulae, the composition cost may be considerably more than 40 per cent of the manufacturing cost, but even if it were 60 per cent of the manufacturing cost, that would still be only of the order of 15 per cent of the retail price. Also, the cost of composition is important only in the fact that it is a relatively inflexible cost and is the same for any given type of composition, whether 100 copies are pro- duced or 10,000 or more. Thus the cost of composition per copy must always be divided by the number of copies that will be distributed, and a costly and beauti- ful method, such as monotype or even handsetting, which would be prohibitive if divided up among 500 copies, is negli- ble when divided among 10,000 copies. This indicates, again, that the probable distribution is the critical factor in deter- mining the economically feasible meth- ods for producing books of any type, and it is of particular importance for scholar- ly books, which in chemistry or other fields never reach the volume of distribu- tion of best-selling novels. There is no problem in producing and marketing a book in chemistry that will sell 10,000 or more copies—the problem is that there are not very many books in this field that will d o that. In that range, even if monotype composition cost $25 per page (and it does not), it would not appreciably affect the cost of the b o o k — even in a 400-page book, composition would represent only one dollar per copy, which would not be an undue proportion of the cost of a scientific book of that size. On the other hand, a cost of half as much per page applied to 1,000 copies of this hypothetical 400-page book of formu- lae would make the composition cost alone about five dollars per copy, which would mean that the book could not be produced unless some method other than monotype composition were used. If we go down to 500 copies, which is the range of the market of many scholarly and sci- entific works, then even if the cost of composition were halved again or even divided by four, monotype would be un- economical. These figures are not meant to imply typical conditions, but rather to emphasize the relationship of the size of edition to the design of the book, regard- less of the actual cost of composition per page, which will vary from country to country and from area to area within some countries. But, as has been noted, costs other than manufacturing account for about three- fourths of the retail price of the average scholarly book, and for more than that JULY, 1956 295 in the case of trade books. Recognizing that discussion of bookkeeping is always parlous, it is nevertheless essential that this general order of relationship of man- ufacturing cost to selling cost be under- stood if we are to ensure unsubsidized publication of scientific books of limited market. This problem, like that of com- position cost, would take care of itself if we could be sure of selling a large enough number of copies. However, to sell books in large quantities requires the coopera- tion and active work of the bookseller and he must be paid in proportion to the amount of effort and time he has to spend. This means that scientific books would have to carry higher discounts to the bookseller than d o trade books, in- stead of the much lower discounts they now offer. This would raise costs, which would in turn further increase the size of edition that would have to be sold to break even, and that would in turn fur- ther increase the necessary cost of adver- tising, sales effort, and so on ad infinitum. Unfortunately, unlike that of many other products, the market of the scien- tific book is not only generally small, it is relatively inflexible, and efforts to push sales much beyond the normal group of interested specialists and libraries that serve them has in the past merely in- creased losses by raising the break-even point to a higher level than the market will absorb. T h e alternatives that are available are: (1) to raise prices; (2) to subsidize the books and periodicals essential to the ad- vancement of science; and (3) to reduce production and distribution costs. As indicated before, there is obviously no problem involved in publishing scien- tific books that will sell 8,000 copies or 10,000 or more. W e have a large and effi- cient technical book publishing industry that can handle these. T h e book that will sell 2,500 or more copies, and that cannot be handled by the book trade, can generally be pub- lished without subsidy by university presses. T h e book that sells less than 2,500 copies is the one that concerns us here. Lest we think that that is a small propor- tion of the total, it should be noted that the director of the University of Illinois Press, who should be in position to know, reported in the Bulletin of American As- sociation of University Professors in 1953 that three-quarters of the books pub- lished by university presses are subsi- dized. Even more important than the number of books that cannot be pub- lished without subsidy is their quality, since those books which advance the fron- tiers of science are generally of interest to relatively few and their importance to society cannot be judged by their poten- tial market. T h e first alternative, i.e., increasing the prices above those conventionally charged for trade books, is not new. Springer-Verlag, among others, has long charged considerably more for its books than we have been accustomed to consider the going rate. In fact, in some cases the prices, when translated through the mysteries of inter- national book selling into dollars, come to between seven and nine cents a page, i.e., from $15 to $20 for a 250-page book, as compared with one to one and a half cents per page for most trade publica- tions. There is danger in this alternative, since it, like the second alternative, tends to subsidize wastefulness in a field in which we cannot afford waste. If raising the price alone is relied upon then the seminal book may be priced so high that even the two or three or five hundred scholars who must have it cannot afford to obtain it. It does seem reasonable to assume that the price for scholarly books in the sciences has to be adjusted to the potential market. A textbook which can be expected to sell 10,000 copies over a period of three or four years can be priced fairly close to the going rate of trade books. O n the other hand the book de- 296 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES signed for a market of 500 copies will probably have to be priced at twice that rate. Even in the depth of the depression in the United States, when trade books were selling for one cent per page or less, according to Robert C. Binkley's funda- mental study on methods of reproducing scholarly materials, scholarly books cost 2.1 cents per page. It does not seem un- reasonable to price books in small edi- tions at approximately twice the going rate for those in large editions. However, one now finds even such things as a sym- posium volume, published in 1955, in which the cost is reduced by the fact that n o royalty need be paid to the authors, selling at the shocking price of $8.75 for a 270-page octavo book. This type of pricing, particularly since much of the text and illustrations is unnecessary and some of it is duplicative, could become an abuse which would probably further hamper the distribution of scientific books. T h e question of pricing is one in which the public generally has fairly strong feelings. In the United States pricing of a book much above one cent per page makes everybody who receives it feel as though it is priced high, despite the fact that the wide variation in storage per page and size of page may make the actu- al storage content of a page vary by a factor of two or more. In this respect, general and scientific public opinion ap- pears less responsible than that of most publishers who, having a monopoly of their product, could price realistically for books of low distribution and most gen- erally d o not d o so because of the public stereotype of a penny per page. Recently, even novels have been bringing a penny and a half per page or more, and chil- dren's books, which commonly provide only forty or fifty or sixty pages of text have been priced at $1.50 to $2.50. T h e answer, therefore, so far as realistic pric- ing is concerned, is probably somewhat less timidity on the part of the publisher in pricing books at two or even two and a half cents per page, if that is necessary to bring them out in small editions. For reasons noted below, however, even that would not make the scientific book of limited market particularly attractive to most trade publishers. T h e second alternative is subsidy, and this habit is growing rapidly, particularly with the development of so-called page rates in the periodical article field. Hav- ing stated that the only thing that we can not afford is to d o without important con- tributions to knowledge, and agreeing with the Royal Society Scientific Infor- mation Conference finding that publica- tion of research is an essential element of research, one cannot quarrel with the need for subsidizing publications when there is no other alternative. In general, however, the objection to subsidizing publications is the danger that we may merely be supporting wasteful methods. This forms a concealed tax upon our scientific research budgets, our scientific libraries, and on the public generally, which should be provided if essential for the good of mankind, but which could readily take over all scientific publishing, since it makes the publisher's task so much easier and lends itself to encour- agement of inefficient production. T h e third and by far the preferable method, probably in combination with the first, is to design production and dis- tribution suitably for the type of book and its potential market. This means utilization when appropriate of letter- press, or offset reproduction from cold composition, or auxiliary publication, or reduced facsimile. Above all, it means design of the overhead of the operation and of the distribution system and costs of the operation suitable for the opti- mum dissemination of the particular book. By and large, too much has been made of production or manufacturing cost. Not only does manufacturing cost constitute a small part of the total cost, but skill in design and skill in selection of sources of JULY, 1956 297 supply may in many cases make what is generally considered the most expensive process the cheapest process. This is true because linotype machines depreciate every hour whether they are used or not and the cost differential between linotype and cold composition for straight text is so slight that it is easy to make cold com- position done inefficiently cost more than linotype composition done efficiently, particularly if such composition is done as fill-in work when the machines would otherwise be idle. It is practically invariably true that cold composition on the typewriter with justified right hand margins, requiring double typing, will cost more than lino- type composition for straightforward work. While it is difficult to generalize for all labor and materials conditions under different pay scales in different countries, by and large, typewriter composition is useful primarily for difficult work such as bibliographies, mathematical and chemi- cal material, and books heavily illustrated with halftones. Bibliographic work whether done in linotype or in typewriter composition generally cannot have justified right hand margins, and suitable design, i.e., placing the item number on the right hand mar- gin, can square off the right hand margin without double typing. Also, the setting of chemical formulae and mathematical equations on the monotype machine is essentially hand work in which both ma- chine and operator are used relatively in- efficiently. In cold composition these can frequently be drawn and pasted in at much lower cost than they can be done on the typecasting machine. Similarly halftone illustrations require expensive screened cuts in conventional printing; whereas the screening charge for the re- production in offset is less than the cost of typing a page of text, so that they are actually cheaper to produce in offset than are text pages. T h e quality is somewhat lower in offset halftones, but reproduc- tion quite satisfactory for most purposes can be obtained by fairly careful work. While the new photographic typeset- ters, operating on the principle devel- oped by both monotype and linotype, may eventually make it possible to make the composition part of the final typing of a manuscript, thus eliminating a large part of the work of composition, these tools are not yet available, and even they will not eliminate composition costs, since the composition typing would be more expensive than would straight typ- ing, and there would still be the cost of running the tape through the photo- graphic composing element to produce the reproduction copy in film. This might reduce the number of copies at which composition could reasonably be amor- tized, but it is doubtful that that would make a 100-copy edition economical. Thus, in cases in which it is not feasible economically to market as many as 300 to 500 copies (and possibly as few as 100 under newly developing technology) oth- er forms of reproduction will be needed. T h e other alternatives that are available include the process known as "auxiliary publication," which was developed by Watson Davis in the American Documen- tation Institute; reduced facsimile edi- tions, whether a 2-4 diameters or greater reduction ratios; and the single copy processes. A U X I L I A R Y P U B L I C A T I O N Auxiliary publication is an interesting combination of multiple copy produc- tion of an abstract of the article or book, tied in with a single-copy service for pro- duction of the whole of the original on demand. One of the important features of this program is that the article is submitted to refereeing, and the journal will not publish the abstract unless the article meets its normal intellectual require- ments, but is too long, too tabular, too profusely illustrated or the like to be printed in full. This technique of auxiliary publica- 298 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES t i o n is n o t g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d t o consti- t u t e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e sense of p r i o r i t y of p u b l i c a t i o n a n d t h u s h a s r e c e i v e d l i t t l e a c c e p t a n c e f r o m s c i e n t i s t s i n t h e U n i t e d States. T h e t e c h n i q u e , h o w e v e r , h a s b e e n a p p l i e d o n a v e r y l a r g e scale i n s u c h o p - e r a t i o n s as t h e p o s t - w a r p r o g r a m f o r m a k - i n g e n e m y t e c h n i c a l d a t a a v a i l a b l e . U p t o 10,000 a r t i c l e s a w e e k w e r e c a l l e d f o r a t t h e p e a k of t h i s service, t h r o u g h t h e s i n g l e - c o p y i n g m e t h o d b a s e d o n t h e O f - fice of T e c h n i c a l Services a b s t r a c t j o u r n a l . M i c r o p r i n t a n d m i c r o c a r d s a r e e d i t i o n processes. T h e t e r m s a r e n o t i d e n t i c a l a n d t h e y a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y c o n f u s e d . T h e m i c r o p r i n t process, as d e v e l o p e d b y Al- f r e d B o n i , is a n offset p r i n t i n g p r o c e s s . I n t h i s p r o c e s s t h e o r i g i n a l is p h o t o - g r a p h e d o n m i c r o f i l m a t a b o u t 20 d i a m e - t e r r e d u c t i o n . A h u n d r e d p a g e s a r e l a i d u p i n film f o r m a n d t h e n b u r n e d i n t o a n offset p l a t e a n d p r i n t e d o n t o c a r d s t o c k . T h i s p r o v i d e s f o r a c c u r a t e i n d e x i n g o n a r e a d i n g m a c h i n e , w i t h a h u n d r e d p a g e s p e r s h e e t . T h e m i c r o c a r d process, w h i c h w a s o r i g i n a l l y d e s c r i b e d by G o l d s c h m i d t a n d Otlet in the Bulletin of the International Institute of Bibliography almost fifty y e a r s a g o , h a s l a t e l y c o m e i n t o a c t i v e use. I t consists of p h o t o g r a p h i n g t h e o r i g i n a l s i n m i c r o f i l m , l a y i n g u p s t r i p s of m i c r o - film a n d t h e n m a k i n g c o n t a c t p r i n t s o n s i l v e r - h a l i d e c o a t e d c a r d s . S i n c e b o t h of t h e s e processes r e q u i r e a r a t h e r l a r g e in- v e s t m e n t i n p r e p a r a t i o n of t h e m a s t e r c o p y , b o t h r e q u i r e e d i t i o n s t o a m o r t i z e t h a t cost a n d t o b r i n g it d o w n t o a r e a s o n - a b l e level. T h e m i n i m u m e c o n o m i c a l edi- t i o n f o r e i t h e r is of t h e o r d e r of t w e n t y t o t h i r t y c o p i e s a n d t h e m i n i m u m l e v e l a t w h i c h t h e y a p p e a r t o c o v e r a l l t h e i r costs is p r o b a b l y of t h e o r d e r of fifty c o p i e s . T h e y d o , h o w e v e r , p r o v i d e a m e t h o d f o r p u b l i s h i n g s c i e n t i f i c a n d t e c h n i c a l b o o k s , r e p o r t s , a n d a r t i c l e s i n e d i t i o n s of less t h a n a h u n d r e d c o p i e s . A p p l i e d w i t h i n t h a t field t h e y a r e of r e a l a s s i s t a n c e . If a p - p l i e d t o p u b l i c a t i o n s w h i c h h a v e a g r e a t - e r p o t e n t i a l a u d i e n c e t h e y m a y a c t u a l l y l i m i t t h e u s e f u l n e s s of t h e b o o k , r a t h e r t h a n b r o a d e n i n g its a v a i l a b i l i t y , b e c a u s e t h e h i g h r e d u c t i o n r a t i o r e s t r i c t s t h e u s e of t h e m a t e r i a l t o l o c a t i o n s a t w h i c h r e a d i n g m a c h i n e s a r e a v a i l a b l e a n d t o t h e n u m b e r of m a c h i n e s a v a i l a b l e . A t h i r d d e v e l o p m e n t i n t h i s g e n e r a l a r e a is t h e s h e e t m i c r o f i l m w h i c h h a s g o n e m u c h f u r t h e r i n E u r o p e t h a n it h a s i n t h e U n i t e d States. T h i s m a y t a k e t h e f o r m a t of e i t h e r t h e m i c r o p r i n t o r t h e m i c r o c a r d a n d h a s t h e c o n s i d e r a b l e ad- v a n t a g e t h a t e n l a r g e m e n t p r i n t s m a y b e m a d e f r o m s h e e t m i c r o f i l m j u s t as f r o m r o l l m i c r o f i l m , w h i l e it is n o t f e a s i b l e t o m a k e e n l a r g e m e n t p r i n t s f r o m m i c r o - p r i n t o r m i c r o c a r d s . F u r t h e r d e v e l o p - m e n t of s h e e t m i c r o f i l m as a s m a l l edi- t i o n p r o c e s s m a y b e a n t i c i p a t e d . A m o n g t h e s i n g l e - c o p y processes m i - c r o f i l m a n d s u b s t a n t i a l l y full-size p h o t o - g r a p h i c c o p i e s a r e t o o w e l l k n o w n t o re- q u i r e t h o r o u g h d i s c u s s i o n . I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d , h o w e v e r , t h a t i n t h e case of r e p r o - d u c t i o n of a r t i c l e s o n d e m a n d t h e r e a r e h i d d e n costs i n t h e u s e of m i c r o f i l m w h i c h a r e n o t a l w a y s c o n s i d e r e d , a n d it m a y v e r y w e l l b e t h a t w h e n w e c o m p u t e a l l t h e costs, i n c l u d i n g d e p r e c i a t i o n a n d costs of e q u i p m e n t f o r r e a d i n g a n d t h e e x t r a use t i m e i n u s i n g m i c r o f i l m a n d get- t i n g t h e m a t e r i a l i n t o t h e m a c h i n e r e a d y t o use, t h a t m i c r o f i l m m a y b e m o r e ex- p e n s i v e i n t o t a l cost f o r t h e a v e r a g e p e r i - o d i c a l a r t i c l e o r r e p o r t t h a n is a f u l l - size o r s u b s t a n t i a l l y full-size c o p y o n pa- p e r . T h i s d o e s n o t a p p l y t o m o r e o r less d e a d s t o r a g e of l o n g r u n s of l i t t l e - u s e d m a t e r i a l s , i n w h i c h m i c r o r e p r o d u c t i o n s h a v e g r e a t a d v a n t a g e s o v e r f u l j - s i z e cop- ies, a t l e a s t u p t o t h e p o i n t of u s e . I t m a y w e l l b e t h a t w e c o u l d p r o f i t a b l y d o f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h o n h i g h s p e e d selec- t i o n of m a t e r i a l s s t o r e d i n m i c r o f i l m f o r m a n d its h i g h s p e e d , l o w cost r e p r o d u c t i o n i n s u b s t a n t i a l l y full-size f o r m f o r u s e w h e r e a n d w h e n n e e d e d . A g o o d d e a l h a s b e e n d o n e i n t h e de- v e l o p m e n t of so-called d r y processes. Ac- t u a l l y n o n e of these, i n c l u d i n g t h e d i a z o - JULY, 1956 299 dye, gelatine transfer, or dye transfer processes will work in the absence of moisture, so the processes are various lev- els of semi-dry processes. T h e one excep- tion is the physical process developed by Nieset at Tulane University which is just coming on the market under the trade name Kalfax. By and large, the dry proc- esses use slower materials than d o the sil- ver bromide processes; in addition, ex- cept for diazo, they use more costly ma- terials. Thus for most purposes, where there is any appreciable volume of copy- ing to be done, these processes d o not provide anything except freedom from the untidy technology of the darkroom, at a considerably higher cost, and gen- erally lower quality, for the substitutes. T h e y are suitable in offices in which only an occasional copy is required. A better solution would appear to be the new effort towards mechanizing the technology of developing and fixing or stabilizing silver bromide prints auto- matically within the camera, which re- tains the quality and relatively low cost of silver bromide materials without in- creasing labor and materials costs. An- other possibility would be the develop- ment of technology for direct production of images on dye papers at about the speed of production of silver bromide prints, and at a lower material cost. Neither of these is now being sold. T h e preceding discussion does not cover all processes or all the steps in all these processes, but it indicates that there is a wide range of alternatives available in the primary j o b of communication, and that it is necessary to consider all the factors involved in deciding which is the proper method for a given purpose. D I S T R I B U T I O N A N D C O P Y R I G H T This discussion of the communication process would not be complete without some consideration of factors other than these mechanical production factors that affect scientific communication. These other factors include restrictions on dis- tribution and methods of distribution. There are many types of restriction on the free flow of scientific information. One which comes up constantly and which has been used to interfere with the right of scholars to access to scholarly ma- terials is that of copyright. A number of libraries refuse to make copies of ma- terials contained in works that are in copyright; others rely upon general agree- ments, which d o not cover a large part of the material in the collections and which are of doubtful value in protecting the library from an infringement suit in any event. Basically, there appears to be only one sensible approach to this matter, and that is to follow the theory of private use. It should be noted that in spite of a his- tory of some fifty years of copying serv- ices in the United States no one can point to a single case in which a library was even brought into court, let alone ad- judged guilty of a violation of copyright, for making copies for scholars on de- mand. In a few cases in which libraries have requested blanket permission from publishers, they receive permission from some, denial of permission from some, and no answer from others (which is ef- fectively a denial). Even where permis- sion has been granted, the owner of the copyright in the journal as a whole may not be the owner of a considerable num- ber of its parts, and if violation is in- volved, a copy of a single page of a news- paper, from which permission has been obtained, may involve the simultaneous copying of copyrighted feature articles which are not the property of the news- paper. T h e confusion stems primarily from two sources. One of these is the natural desire of the representatives of publishers to extend the value of their property to its maximum limits, and the other is the confusion by librarians and scholars of the plain ordinary English verb " t o copy" with the legal meaning of copying in the sense that would constitute a violation of the copyright act. There are several fair- ly clear cases in English law which deal with this point. In the case of Abernethy 300 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES vs. Hutchinson (L.J. O l d Series 3:209, 217, Cases in Chancery, 1825) the Court said, " I have not the slightest difficulty in my own mind, that a lecturer may say to those who hear h i m — ' Y o u are entitled to take notes for your own use, and to use them, perhaps, in every way, except for the purpose of printing them for profit; you are not to buy my lectures to sell again; you come here to hear them for your own use, and for your own use you may take notes' . . . " Similarly in the case of Nichols vs. Pitman (L.R. Chan- cery Div. v. 26, p. 379, 381, 1884) the Court said, " T h e Defendant is a short- hand writer, and he attended and took down a copy—almost verbatim—of the lecture in shorthand; which of course he had a perfect right to do. Merely taking down a lecture in shorthand is not a breach of any right at all. T h e Defendant might take notes of the lecture and use them for the purpose of refreshing his memory, or for any similar purpose he might choose. " T h e question here is whether having taken the lecture down he had a right to publish it and for profit." A n d the Court went on to say, " H e was, therefore, clearly of opinion, that, when persons are admitted as pupils or other- wise to hear these lectures . . . and al- though the parties might go to the extent, if they were able to d o so, of putting down the whole lecture by means of shorthand, yet they could do that only for the purposes of their own informa- tion, and could not publish for profit that which they had not obtained the right of selling." It should be noted particularly that the Abernethy case transferred this rea- soning to publication of a book. Quite clearly, making a copy is not a copying in the sense of the copyright law; and quite clearly it was never intended that private use was to be affected in any way by the copyright. Copyright was and is still intended to protect the author against use of his labors publicly by oth- ers for profit without sharing those prof- its with the author. It is, at least in the United States, clearly and primarily in- tended to make the author's information available, and it is for that purpose that our Constitution empowers the Congress to grant a monopoly of public uses. Actually, it would be impossible to stop private use even if it were intended to have the copyright law effect that un- desirable end. T o enforce such a law would require stationing a policeman with every copy of every book to make sure that n o one made notes. Also, since committing it to memory and then using a copyright work publicly is a violation of the copyright, we should have to de- velop new orders of intellectual detec- tion to determine whether any of the ma- terial was being memorized. Furthermore, if libraries were acces- sories to a crime in providing copying services, they would also be accessories by providing chairs for the scholar to sit in, tables at which to write, and light and other services to enable him to d o it. This is obviously ridiculous. But why draw the line between selling fountain pen ink to a man so that he might copy, and permitting him to use his own Con- toura camera or to have his agent d o for him what he rightfully can d o himself? T h e only reasonably sane solution is to recognize that private use is completely outside the scope and intent of restric- tion by copyright. If a later public use is made, that may be a violation of a copy- right; but that would be independent of whether the violating use were made from the original, from a copy written out in the man's own hand, or from a photocopy provided by a library; the copying which would be a potential vio- lation would be the public use; and the act of making a copy for private use is obviously (to this writer, at least) not a violation of anything at all. One of the arguments that ought to be investigated a little further is the fear of publishers of books in small editions that the new forms will reduce sales enough to make the edition uneconomical. JULY, 1956 301 There is no evidence that this has ever happened. But to counter a generaliza- tion based on no evidence with a gen- eralization based on one case, the writer's own book on copyright was and still is available in microfilm from the Univer- sity of Chicago Library. It has been ad- vertised in their list of dissertations avail- able from time to time since 1950. Since the author had to pay for the negative it is possible for the library to sell the film for somewhat less than half the cost of the printed book. T h e printed book was published in an edition of a thousand copies, which were sold out by the end of 1952, and now brings a premium in the out-of-print market. T h e microfilm edi- tion has sold three copies from early in 1950 to mid-1955. Certainly, if we are going to restrict the right of scholars to access to materials to which they have every right to access, we should have more definite evidence than the vague fear that the publisher may not be able to issue a book because microfilm will take over the market. Furthermore, it should be noted that none of the photographic processes can compete with the book in print, either in price per page or in convenience of use. It is only in the case of the rare book (in which the author's likelihood of profit is very slight indeed) that the price of the book is likely to be greater than that of a photographic copy. Furthermore, if we agree that the schol- ar has the legal right to go to the library himself to copy the book by long hand, but does not have the right to have it done for him by an agent, we are only discarding the well established law of agency, we are in the ridiculous position of insisting that the scholar has the right to make a copy for his private use only if he does so under conditions of maxi- mum inefficiency in the use of his time and resources. If that were the law, then we can only respectfully refer to Mr. Bumble in Oliver Twist. In view of the fifty years of experience in this field and until there is some per- suasive evidence against the theory of private use, and in view of the fact that there is no court record, in the United States at least, that would give any indi- cation of violation by copying in lieu of manual copying by the scholar and for his private use, it would seem that an unwarranted timidity on our part inter- feres with the advancement of science. Copyright is but one of the bars to free communication of scientific information. Some are derived from the fact that no patent can offer as good protection as a trade secret that can be kept, and others derive from the needs of governments to protect themselves in these parlous times. Others result from the fact that the book trade cannot market short-discount books, and still others derive from the fact that currency restrictions still exist in a good many parts of the world, many of which are not reached by even a trickle of Unesco book coupons. In fact, the re- strictions on free flow of scientific infor- mation are so varied and so great that if it were not f o r the fact that we d o man- age to publish many thousands of books and articles each year and to list a sub- stantial portion of them in bibliographi- cal tools and to make a great many of them available through library loans or copying services, this picture might be downright discouraging. N o matter what we do about the reduc- tion of manufacturing costs, overhead and the cost of selling books will still be the major factors in determining whether they can be produced without subsidy. A far-flung organization, suitable and essential for marketing trade books, costs very little per copy for the 10,000-copy book. It costs so much per copy for the 500-copy book that even if the manufac- turing were free, and the pricing were exorbitant, it is doubtful that the 500- copy book could pay its own way in a firm designed for trade operations. T h e costs of selling books, including design of pretty book jackets, advertising, bad debts, etc. are also small costs per copy 302 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES a n d a r e necessities i n t h e t r a d e b o o k ; t h e y a r e p r o h i b i t i v e i n t h e 500-copy b o o k . M u c h of t h i s s t e m s f r o m t h e d e e p r o o t e d belief o n t h e p a r t of a u t h o r s a n d p u b l i s h e r s a l i k e t h a t a b o o k is a f a i l u r e if its sales d o n o t r u n i n t o five f i g u r e s . B u t t h e a p p r o a c h ( w h i c h r e s u l t s i n over- h e a d a n d s e l l i n g costs) f o r t h e d e s i g n , p r o d u c t i o n a n d d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e b o o k of five-figure sales is w h a t m a k e s i t " i m - p o s s i b l e " t o p u b l i s h t h e b o o k w h i c h w i l l c o u n t its sales i n t h r e e figures. U n t i l w e r e a l i z e t h a t t h e m i n i m u m e s s e n t i a l dis- t r i b u t i o n of a s c h o l a r l y b o o k is m o r e i m - p o r t a n t t h a n n o d i s t r i b u t i o n , w e w i l l con- t i n u e t o h a v e t r o u b l e w i t h t h i s p r o b l e m . A f t e r all, if a b o o k is a v a i l a b l e t o s c h o l a r s i n 300 t o 500 l i b r a r i e s a l l o v e r t h e w o r l d , its i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n t e n t is q u i t e r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e t o t h o s e w o r k i n g a t t h e f r o n - t i e r s of k n o w l e d g e , a n d i t m i g h t , t h e r e - f o r e , b e a s s u m e d t h a t t h a t is o u r m i n i - m u m social a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l - i t y f o r t h e s e m i n a l b o o k . A s a m a t t e r of f a c t , if as f e w as 300 t o 500 s p e c i a l i s t s a n d t h e l i b r a r i e s t h a t s e r v e t h e m w o u l d a g r e e t o t a k e a u t o m a t i c a l l y ( a n d p a y f o r ) p r o p - e r l y r e f e r e e d b o o k s i n t h e i r s p e c i a l s u b - j e c t fields, t h e r e w o u l d b e n o p r o b l e m of p u b l i s h i n g t h e s e m i n a l b o o k s i n t h e sciences o r o t h e r s c h o l a r l y fields; a n d s i n c e t h e m a r k e t i n g costs w o u l d l a r g e l y b e e l i m i n a t e d u n d e r s u c h a n a r r a n g e - m e n t , t h e p r i c e c o u l d b e h e l d d o w n t o a v e r y r e a s o n a b l e level. T h i s w o u l d r e q u i r e r e c o g n i t i o n of t h e p r i n c i p l e of e n s u r i n g a t l e a s t m i n i m a l a v a i l a b i l i t y , t h e estab- l i s h m e n t of n a r r o w c a t e g o r i e s f o r sub- s c r i p t i o n , a n i m p e c c a b l e b o a r d of r e f - e r e e s f o r e a c h of t h e c a t e g o r i e s , a n d , a b o v e a l l , t h e w i l l i n g n e s s of t h o s e w h o a r e c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e p r o b l e m of p u b - l i s h i n g s e m i n a l b o o k s , b o t h s u b j e c t spe- cialists a n d t h e l i b r a r i e s t h a t serve t h e m , t o d o t h e o n e t h i n g t h a t w o u l d solve t h e p r o b l e m of p u b l i s h i n g t h e s e b o o k s — a n d t h a t is t o b u y t h e m . S U M M A R Y C o n s i d e r e d a g a i n , i n s u m m a r y , as a c o m m u n i c a t i o n s p r o b l e m s , a l t h o u g h t h e r e a r e s o m e p r o b l e m s , t h e r e h a s b e e n m u c h p r o g r e s s . W e h a v e s i n g l e - c o p y processes t h a t c a n a n d d o m a k e a l m o s t a n y t h i n g t h a t e x i s t s i n t h e c i v i l i z e d w o r l d a v a i l a b l e t o a n y s c h o l a r w h o n e e d s it, h a s t h e p e r s e v e r - e n c e (or l i b r a r i a n ) t o find it a n d t h e con- t a c t s t o g e t it. W e h a v e s m a l l e d i t i o n processes, p r i - m a r i l y i n r e d u c e d f a c s i m i l e , w h i c h c a n p r o d u c e e d i t i o n s of as f e w as 25 c o p i e s . W e h a v e r e d u c e d offset a n d offset p r o c - esses t h a t c a n r e a s o n a b l y p r o d u c e e d i - t i o n s of 100 t o 500 c o p i e s . W e h a v e a f e w s m a l l , l o w - o v e r h e a d p u b l i s h i n g h o u s e s t h a t c a n p r o d u c e e d i - t i o n s of 500 t o 1,000 c o p i e s o r m o r e w i t h - o u t s u b s i d y ; a n d a s s u m i n g t h a t t h e m a r - k e t i n g c o u l d b e s i m p l i f i e d by a u t o m a t i c m a r k e t i n g t h r o u g h i n t e r e s t e d societies a n d g r o u p s , t h i s e d i t i o n l i m i t c o u l d p r o b - a b l y b e r e d u c e d t o 300. W e h a v e u n i v e r s i t y presses, w h i c h c a n fill t h e g a p b e t w e e n t h e 1,000-copy b o o k a n d t h e 2,500-copy b o o k w i t h s u b s i d y , o r t h e 2,500- t o 5,000-copy b o o k w i t h o u t s u b s i d y . A n d w e h a v e a s t r o n g a n d efficient s c i e n t i f i c p u b l i s h i n g i n d u s t r y t h a t c a n t a k e o v e r f r o m t h a t p o i n t . T h u s , c o u n t i n g o u r b l e s s i n g s r a t h e r t h a n o u r s h o r t c o m i n g s i n t h i s field, w h a t is r e m a r k a b l e is t h a t w e h a v e c o m e as f a r as w e h a v e i n t h e field of s c i e n t i f i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n . W e still h a v e p r o b l e m s t o solve, a n d t h e r e a r e a n u m b e r of a r e a s i n w h i c h o b j e c t i v e s t u d y s h o u l d d e v e l o p b e t t e r , c h e a p e r , a n d m o r e e f f e c t i v e t o o l s of c o m m u n i c a t i o n . B u t t h e t i m e a p p e a r s t o h a v e c o m e t o give u p o u r p l e a s a n t h a b i t of f u l m i n a t i n g a b o u t g e n e r a l i t i e s a b o u t t h e s a d s t a t e of s c i e n t i f i c p u b l i s h - i n g . L e t u s s u b s t i t u t e t h e s c i e n t i f i c m e t h - o d i n t h e field of s c i e n t i f i c c o m m u n i c a - t i o n , i d e n t i f y i n g t h e p r o b l e m s , i n v e s t i - g a t i n g t h e m t o d e t e r m i n e t h e i r t r u e n a - t u r e , t h e i r scope, a n d t h e i r f r e q u e n c y so t h a t w e c a n d e t e r m i n e a n d a p p l y t h e s u i t - a b l e a m o u n t of e f f o r t a n d t h e s u i t a b l e levels of d e s i g n a n d e x e c u t i o n t o t h e i r a m e l i o r a t i o n o r s o l u t i o n . JULY, 1956 303