Aspen Backs Off New Casebook Policy

There are some things law profs apparently hold sacred.  One of them is a student's right to purchase and own her casebook.  A few days ago, Aspen publishing (i.e., Wolters Kluwer) announced that its much-adopted Dukeminier Property casebook would be available solely on a lease basis.  (This, at least, is my interpretation of their announcement.)  Apparently unaware that Property profs - of all profs - might have a view about a student's ownership rights to a casebook, Aspen wrote to profs who adopt Dukeminier: 

This title will be part of our new Connected Casebook program. The Connected Casebook program is intended to provide students access to a greater wealth of learning tools than offered previously, with no change in price. Under the Connected casebook program, your students will receive:

• A new, bound version of the casebook, which can be marked-up, highlighted, and kept through the length of the course, but which must be returned to us at the conclusion of the class.

• Lifetime access to CasebookConnect, a rich digital companion to the casebook, containing a full digital version of the casebook as well as selected proven learning accelerators, such as examples, explanations, and a collection of issue-spotting and hypothetical exercises.

This letter resulted in  discomfort ranging from disquiet to outrage: Josh Blackmun, Rebecca Tushnet, and of course James Grimmelman.  

First sale doctrine may be a bitch, but Aspen has now cried Uncle.  Students can continue to buy the Dukeminier classic and will presumably be able to pull it off their dusty shelves to compare it to the 27th edition their grandchildren will be assigned in Fall, 2067. 

I wonder if the great (and now retired) George Serafin would have prevented this mini-train wreck.  He always seemed to know what was going down with his faculty.

Comments

[Alberto Bernabe]

I read somewhere else that Aspen just modified the policy. Students who want to keep the book won't get the digital materials. If they want the digital materials, they have to return the book. Either way, count me among those who will not use Aspen books while this abusive policy is in place. Aspen wants to sell their overpriced books and then eliminate student access to less expensive used books. At a time when so many are complaining about the high cost of legal education, professors should oppose this policy. Our students should have the right to own, sell or buy used, less expensive, books.

[Jeff Harrison]

This whole thing seems like much ado but perhaps a bit hypocritical. I have heard the phrase "the are killing first sale." You cannot kill first sale but you can contract around it. When that happens the price of the book is higher. Instead of a net cost of say 150- 50 for resale or 100, the book is 150. So, all of this would be more convincing if those in an uproar have a history of price sensitivity when it comes to books. For example, it is easy to adopt the most recent old edition of may books.

[ATLprof]

I know professors who regularly adopt the most recent old editions for reasons of student affordability. However, that ability would have gone away for these books, if Aspen had gone to a model that eliminated resale. While it may not be as widespread as it should be, there are professors who take price sensitivity into account.

Additionally, no one (of those that spoke out against the initial policy) believed that there was going to be any cost savings in the long run. In other words, no one believed that Aspen was going to end up charging less for the licensed/leased books, if that was the only option students had.

Now, with Aspen offering both options, we may actually see some price difference/benefit.