LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:28:11 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (93 lines)
From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:43:45 -0500

It would also have been a more sensible option if universities had
supported their own publishing infrastructure more in the first place
and not allowed commercial publishers to establish such a dominant
position in STM journal publishing. In the immediate postwar years
that was still a live option. Administrative myopia helped create the
conditions that Kevin deplores.

Sandy Thatcher


> From: Kevin Smith <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 05:11:35 +0000
>
> So what is the current scenario?  Major research university gives away
> it intellectual property, to publishers, has to buy it back at very
> high cost, then cuts faculty for lack of funding.  What is ridiculous
> is that anyone could seriously maintain that OA is not a more sensible
> option.
>
> Kevin L. Smith, J.D.
> Director of Scholarly Communication
> Duke University
> Perkins Library
> Durham, NC 27708
>
>
> On Jun 22, 2012, at 9:04 PM, "LIBLICENSE" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>  From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
>>  Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 11:31:12 -0700
>>
>>  It's really troubling to see all these discussions taking place as
>>  though the only thing that matters is short-term cost and revenue
>>  projections.  Does everyone really think the world does not change
>>  from time to time?  It is simply not in a research university's
>>  interest to support OA, green, gold, or any other flavor.  Most
>>  research is produced at a small number of institutions; OA is in the
>>  interest of organizations (most colleges and universities, the
>>  corporate sector, and government and NGOs) that don't produce the
>
>  > research.  There is a total absence of strategic thinking here.
>  >
>  > So what's the scenario?  Major research university X gives away its
>  > intellectual property and then cuts faculty for lack of funding.
>>
>>  Ridiculous.
>>
>>  Joe Esposito
>>
>>  On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>>  From: Richard Poynder <[log in to unmask]>
>>>  Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:19:29 +0100
>>>
>>>  An interview with the Vice-Provost (Research) at University College
>>>  London, Professor David Price.
>>>
>>>  Some quotes:
>>>
>>>  "Economic modelling shows that, for research universities, the Green
>>>  route to OA is more cost effective than the Gold. Under Gold Research
>>>  Councils and Universities will have to find millions of pounds in
>>>  existing budgets to fund OA charges. That means that some things will
>>>  have to stop to make the necessary monies available."
>>>
>>>  "The Finch recommendations are not good news for the Humanities, whose
>>>  unit of publication is characteristically the research monograph. Who
>>>  will publish Gold OA monographs, and who will pay for them?"
>>>
>>>  "The result of the Finch recommendations would be to cripple
>>>  university systems with extra expense. Finch is certainly a cure to
>>>  the problem of access, but is it not a cure which is actually worse
>>>  than the disease?"
>>>
>>>  "What Finch should have done is to model Green and Gold together, to
>>>  see which works out cheaper. A forthcoming report from the JISC's Open
>>>  Access Implementation Group on the impact of APC charges on
>>>  universities does this - and comes up with a different scenario to
>>>  Finch."
>>>
>>>  David Price's message to UK Minister for Universities and Science
>>>  David Willetts: "Listen to UCL's response to Finch and carry on
>>>  talking to get the best transitional model from where we are now to a
>>>  fully OA world. The Finch recommendations are only part of the
>>>  answer."
>>>
>>>  More here:
>>>
>>> http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/finch-report-ucls-david-price-responds.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2