2017
DOI: 10.5325/libraries.1.2.0171
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Libraries and Publisher Price Control: The Net Price System (1901–1914) and Contemporary E-book Pricing

Abstract: 5325/libraries.1.2.0171?seq=1&cid=pdfreference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
(2 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More importantly, the producers of cultural commodities take efforts in increasing the exposure of the products in the repertoire through various distribution channels. Zhang and Senchyne (2017) found that book publishers in the early 1900's mainly relied on bookstores to increase the exposure of their whole list of books to potential customers. Similarly, university presses' reliance on the four vendors to distribute their e‐books could be treated as a contemporary version of the strategy, since presses perceived these vendors as the main outlets for libraries to purchase e‐books particularly in social sciences and humanities, although libraries' preference over certain vendors varied.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…More importantly, the producers of cultural commodities take efforts in increasing the exposure of the products in the repertoire through various distribution channels. Zhang and Senchyne (2017) found that book publishers in the early 1900's mainly relied on bookstores to increase the exposure of their whole list of books to potential customers. Similarly, university presses' reliance on the four vendors to distribute their e‐books could be treated as a contemporary version of the strategy, since presses perceived these vendors as the main outlets for libraries to purchase e‐books particularly in social sciences and humanities, although libraries' preference over certain vendors varied.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, university presses' preference over DRMed e‐books demonstrates their efforts to reduce the fragility brought by the limited scarcity of cultural commodities. A common way to reduce this type of fragility is to limit the access to the product, like adding DRM to e‐books (Striphas, 2011 and Zhang & Senchyne, 2017). Not surprisingly, university presses, despite their not‐for‐profit nature, still need to follow the general business principle to generate sufficient revenue to cover their cost.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation