LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML 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:
Sun, 21 Oct 2018 08:50:13 -0400
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (857 bytes) , text/html (1576 bytes)
From: leo waaijers <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 14:41:45 +0200

The Fair Open Access Alliance has released extensive recommendations on the
implementation of Plan S. They call for clarifying terminology, for support
of no-fee Open Access initiatives, and for making any new infrastructure
public and open. Perhaps the most important recommendation is to build cost
transparency into the capped publication fee.


Read more:
https://www.fairopenaccess.org/2018/10/21/foaa-recommendations-on-the-implementation-of-plan-s/


Meanwhile, Elsevier started a gold OA clone of their subscription journal
Water Research (0043-1354) under the name Water Research X (2589-9147).
Interestingly enough, the FOAA recommendations already foresaw such tactics
and argue that a careful definition of ‘hybrid’ should prevent the Plan S
compliancy of such journals.


ATOM RSS1 RSS2