From: Karin Wikoff <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 11:30:31 +0000

Jenica Rogers at SUNY Potsdam made quite a name for herself by saying
No to Elsevier.  The money simply wasn't there, so she canceled the
subscription.  I suspect it was a brave act of desperation.

I agree that we are often between a rock and a hard place when any
given content provider is the only source for needed resources.  Until
more critical content can be had elsewhere, it's hard to have any
leverage in negotiations.  You need to know that you can play hard
ball -- that you can walk away if you can't get the concessions you
want and need.  A lot of times, you can't, and then you haven't much
choice about accepting unacceptable terms and prices.

The response we got from Elsevier on the subject of "some of our
libraries just do not have the money in our budgets" was that we need
to convince our administration that we just have to have more money so
we can pay for Elsevier.  Wow -- are they out of touch with reality.

I really appreciated Kevin Smith's blog a while back on Elsevier and
OA and the report he included from the perspective of the impact of OA
on the shareholder if Elsevier continues their current practice of
never backing down from their large profit margins.  Worth digging up
and reading again as things in the OA world move forward.

Karin Wikoff
Electronic and Technical Services Librarian
Ithaca College Library
Ithaca, NY 14850
Email: [log in to unmask]
________________________________________

From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 04:21:02 +0000

>I too would like to know who walks the walk, and has not caved even
>when Elsevier (or other) publisher has tried to renegotiate with you
>and thrown you a juicy bone?

<snip>

>Who sticks to their principles, and just says very firmly, NO.

There's a problem here, though, and that's the fact that multiple
principles are involved here, and they're in conflict. For example, I
arguably have an obligation to exert market pressure on Elsevier and
thereby (hopefully) influence it to change some of its practices. I also
have an obligation to meet the research needs of my students and faculty
-- many of whom, in order to do their scholarly work, rely on access to
content that is only available from Elsevier. It doesn't appear that I can
stay true to both of those principles simultaneously.

This is something I genuinely struggle with all the time: when trying to
change the world of scholarly communication for the better in the long run
conflicts with meeting the needs of my local scholars in the short run,
how do I resolve that conflict?

---
Rick Anderson
Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections
Marriott Library, University of Utah
[log in to unmask]