Very old readers of Rabett Run will remember that among the first Bunny Posts were some about the US textbook scam pointing out that the base problem was that the people who ordered the books (the profs) were not the ones who paid for them (the kids) and that the ones who profited (the publishers) were constantly finding ways to bribe the profs and screw the kids, while the ones who paid, the kids were on the lookout for ways to avoid paying full price for the books.
Given that the cost of a chemistry or math text in the US has broken the $200 limit, and the same damn things cost half or less in Europe, this is not a good situation.
Never let it be said that someone, who is so minded, can't make a bad situation worse. News comes of one Joseph Henry Vogel at UPR Rio Piedras, has received a patent on the idea that students could be required to pay a large fee to participate in on line discussion forums if they did not buy the book, or take a substantial hit to their grades.
Motivation for a faculty member doing such a thing, well how about if the faculty member writes a book. Too obvious, Eli thought, so the Bunny went and RTFP. Blather, but then the rubber hits the road
One suspects that the teacher/professor will only accept the diminished academic freedom implied by requirements (1), (2), and (3), because he or she perceives that the system will enhance academic freedom in other key areas of concern, with the gains outweighing the losses. In particular, a percentage of the net royalty income such as, for example, 50% generated from textbooks sold by presses using the system, collected in the US and Canada may be dedicated to litigating tenure disputes from both within and outside the university walls. The job stability afforded by tenure is the wellspring of academic freedom.Eli rather suspects that Joe Henry anticipates a problem considering
Toward this end the royalty income may be distributed as follows (assuming that the total allocated income is 50% of the royalty income): 10% for actions challenging post tenure-reviews, 10% for actions challenging , 10% for unionization of non-tenurable professors, 10% for actions challenging grant decisions by private foundations (with these monies being allocated to an organization such as American Association of University Professors) and 10% for dissemination of news regarding academic freedom (with this money being allocated to an organization, such as The Chronicle of Higher Education or similar institutions dedicated to academic freedom and/or development of the faculty community).Everyone appears to have missed those little goodies.