The reason for self-publishing this book is not that publishers were not interested. On the contrary. The author was pleased to receive interest from several publishers, and contracts from two of the most well-known academic publishing houses in the UK.

The reason the book is self-published is that the author chose not to sign either contract, due to the breadth of the indemnity required. Agreeing to the standard warranties – and to indemnify the publisher in respect of breach – is one thing, but in what another publisher described as ‘industry standard wording’, the author was also expected to indemnify the publisher in respect of any costs and expenses etc arising from any claim or allegation of breach, even where the alleged facts and circumstances were untrue or ill-founded. In both cases, the publishers described themselves as bound by their insurers not to agree any amendment to this clause, leaving the author exposed to potential liabilities that are well beyond his or her control, and which test the bounds of reasonableness. (Interestingly, it seems that this ‘industry standard’ has crept in somewhat unnoticed in the UK, and that the wording is not standard in either Australia or the US.)

As Professor Andrew Tettenborn put it: ‘The argument that authors should be required to stand by their research hardly justifies extending the liability even to cases of entirely spurious claims.’* One might believe – or expect – that there are some easy solutions: that insurance can be readily obtained on the open market; or that any risks are covered by an employing institution’s insurance arrangements; or that universities will agree to indemnify their research-active employees against any such potential liabilities; or that funders might put limits on the extent of personal liability publishers can impose on researchers. Regrettably, it is not so simple.

Academics, universities and funders may need to give urgent consideration to the impact of such clauses. The most obvious concern is around legal liability, but academics might also face the added pressures of being advised that their self-published research is not eligible for REF – a concern which universities should also be keen to address – and/or that the act of self-publishing will be damaging to their prospects of promotion.

* Andrew Tettenborn, ‘Academics contributing to books are risking their livelihoods’ Times Higher Education (15 September 2022)