 
| Subject: | |
| From: | |
| Reply To: | |
| Date: | Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:00:40 -0400 |
| Content-Type: | text/plain |
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
From: Sally Morris <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:35:28 +0100
Subject: RE: The Finch Report: UCL's David Price Responds
Those university presses, learned societies etc that have succeeded seem to
attract much the same opprobrium as other publishers...
Sally Morris
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
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
|
|
|
