From: "Guédon Jean-Claude" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 11:18:21 +0000

When I read a statement expressing an outlandish hypothesis about a
closed meetings of librarians and scholars, I clearly see the
sub-text. By the same principle, any seminar would run afoul of "the
law". Which law, incidentally? US? German? Martian?

Whether this is mind reading or not is not my concern. From my
perspective, it is simply discourse analysis.

As for an apology, I do not begin to fathom what the apology might be about.

This said, happy holidays ... and peace to all beings (men included)
of good will.

Jean-Claude Guédon
________________________________________

From: Alex Holzman <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 21:04:11 -0500

Jean-Claude, unless you can read minds, you have no idea what Joe
Esposito was thinking when he asked about possible antitrust
implications of the meeting.  Regardless of your personal views, the
question of whether the meeting might run afoul of any laws is in
itself completely unbiased.  It's a question about law.  And it is
certainly neither a threat from Joe nor his endorsement of
oligarchies. From where I sit, you owe an apology.

Thanks,

Alex Holzman


On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 8:04 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: "Guédon Jean-Claude" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:41:30 +0000
>
> Joseph Esposito's remark is really weird if we think about the fact
> that we live in the context of a tight oligopoly of a few commercial
> publishers. But that seems to be all right, at least to him!
>
> On the other hand, when some librarians and researchers join together
> for a quiet strategy meeting, the threat of antitrust is immediately
> raised. And I mean "threat".  Amazing!
>
> Does anyone on this list remember professor Barschall who was sued
> (under anti-trust provisions) in four countries for displaying
> accurate comparative figures of publishing costs for a set of physics
> journals. Gordon and Breach was behind this, in personal terms, cruel
> move. Gordon and Breach lost everywhere. With deep pockets, they
> annoyed Barschall literally to death for between ten and twelve years.
> It all stopped only when Wiley took over Gordon & Breach.
>
> Orwell's notion that some are more equal than others is turning out to
> be ever more accurate.
>
> As for the possible relationship between ethics and profit seeking, I
> will the readers judge.
>
> Jean-Claude Guédon
>
> ________________________________________
>
> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:33:16 -0500
>
> I would be interested to know from lawyers familiar with antitrust
> issues whether this development may face legal challenges.
>
> Joe Esposito
>
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 10:04 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 21:59:50 -0500
> >
> > Berlin 12 Conference Focuses on Proposal to Flip Subscription Journals
> > to Open Access
> >
> > Reporte by Kathleen Shearer. Association of Research Libraries
> > Partnership Consultant
> >
> > "On December 8 and 9, 2015, representatives from several regions
> > (Asia, Europe, and North America) met in Berlin, Germany, to discuss a
> > proposal to flip subscription-based journals to open access models.
> > The initiative is being led by the Max Planck Society, the organizer
> > and host of the invitation-only Berlin 12 Open Access Conference. The
> > rationale for the initiative is based on an analysis undertaken by Max
> > Planck Digital Library (MPDL), which found that a flip to open access
> > would be possible at no financial risk, “maybe even at lower overall
> > costs” to the system.
> >
> > "The objective of the conference was to build a consensus for an
> > internationally coordinated effort to shift libraries’ journal budgets
> > away from subscriptions and towards article processing costs (APCs).
> > The meeting was attended by 96 participants from 19 countries, with
> > several US and Canadian representatives. The major point of discussion
> > was an expression of interest (EOI) that would form the basis for
> > gaining support and moving forward with the initiative. Once
> > published, organizations will be invited to sign the EOI and it will
> > be used to galvanize interest in the initiative around the world."
> >
> > Ms. Shearer's full report is found at:
> >
> > http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/2015.12.18-Berlin12Report.pdf
> >
> > Interesting to read about what may be be an underlying difference
> > between the US and other countries on the matter of conversion to open
> > access.  At least some US representatives seek a transition in which
> > there are real reductions in the costs of the scholarly publications
> > system and assert that a key to success is greater competition in that
> > system.  The Max Planck proposal appears to be more straightforward --
> > a swap (flip) of subscription payments for models that assure open access.