From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 22:56:06 -0400

"Which implies some level of responsibility."  I am not arguing with
that, nor do I have any reason to defend Elsevier.  I am asking a
different question:  How does one assess a service provider?  If
HighWire or Atypon provide Web hosting for a bad journal, do we object
to them?

I don't know the specifics of Elsevier's relationship with the journal
in question, and I am not trying to reopen the Bohannon debate.  What
I am wondering about, in the abstract, is whether or not service
providers are responsible for editorial decisions.  It's not an easy
call.

Joe Esposito


On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:08 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: David Prosser <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 08:53:22 +0100
>
> This is a very interesting case.  On Elsevier's website, we see:
>
> Imprint: Elsevier
>
> Which implies some level of responsibility.  But even more intriguing,
> the journal does not appear to be openly available through the
> Elsevier website -  papers are only available either to Science Direct
> subscribers or for purchase at $31.50 a paper:
>
> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09757619
>
> The papers are freely available from the journal website (which
> equally intriguingly carries an Elsevier copyright notice, although
> the papers themselves are copyright JPR Solutions):
>
> http://www.ditonline.org/home
>
> As far as I can see, and it is a little foggy to me, this journal is
> generating author income, big deal revenue and pay-per-view
> possibilities - all for the same articles.  It appears to have all of
> the bases covered
>
> David
>
>
>
> On 23 Oct 2013, at 22:15, LIBLICENSE wrote:
>
> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 21:59:52 -0400
>
> I was under the impression that Elsevier did not publish the journal
> that accepted the "sting" article, but that Elsevier has a services
> arrangement with the journal's publisher.  Am I mistaken about this?
> It's a material item.  In a service relationship, Elsevier ( or any of
> the publishers that do this kind of thing, including Wiley, OUP,
> Cambridge, Springer, Sage, etc., etc.), the service provider has not
> involvement with editorial selection.  Consider the alternative:
> would anyone want a service provider to be telling the professional
> societies whose journals they host and distribute what to publish?
>
> Assigning responsibility in a situation like this is complicated.  But
> once again we should thank Bohannon for making everybody pay
> attention.
>
> Joe Esposito