Why would experienced researchers like faculty include Vera in their searching repertoire?
Library databases—all of which can be accessed through Vera—generally offer information that is more consistently relevant and reliable (and may also be peer-reviewed).
Google is quite fast with a single search box, is well embedded in many browsers, and can do a general search across all disciplines at the same time. Often, however, the information found in library databases is not, or cannot be, indexed in Google.
Library databases on a subject are likely more in-depth, although they may not be quite as fast to search, and a single database generally does not cover all academic disciplines.
This article is the first of a series of two. The author describes how they typical arguments on both sides of the ebook debate, from publishers and libraries, do not actually work, since they have their basis in older models of sales and library use of physical items. Since ebooks are leased, not actually sold, the author suggests a pay-by-circulation model, since it is easier to track and will be less risky for libraries. This model would have to be done carefully, or it may backfire. It certainly is more fair, but I wonder how much of the electronic publishing industry remains afloat from selling packages-- that is, large sets of ebooks that have appeal because, among their numbers, they do have high-demand titles. A pay-by-circulation model could mean that libraries can license individual titles from publishers, completely bypassing unknown ebooks that need libraries for exposure.
