From: Jan Velterop <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:18:15 +0100

At the Budapest Open Access Initiative meeting in, well, Budapest, in
December 2001, the term Open Access was first agreed upon to describe
the sort of free access to scholarly research literature that is
needed (it was published in February 2002):

“By ‘open access’ to this literature, we mean its free availability on
the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy,
distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these
articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or
use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or
technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to
the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and
distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should
be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the
right to be properly acknowledged and cited.”

In order to be clear as to the meaning of Open Access in publishing, I
propose ditching terms such as 'green', 'gold', 'gratis', 'libre',
'titanium', etcetera, which are confusing at best. I propose using the
term "BOAI-compliant Open Access" instead, which would be a lot less
ambiguous, and would separate the wheat from the chaff.

Jan Velterop


On 21 Dec 2011, at 05:39, LIBLICENSE wrote:

From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 21:42:57 -0800

Taylor & Francis's program is open access.  Michael Carroll's
insistence that OA has a special and narrow meaning is one we have
heard on this list many times. But OA has many meanings.  Advocates of
a special kind of OA could have prevented these multiple meanings from
arising had they trademarked a term for the variety they prefer.

In my view, OA means free to read for the end-user.  All the other
stipulations are extraneous.

Joe Esposito

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:49 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


From: Michael Carroll <[log in to unmask]>

Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:20:09 -0500

Dear Jennifer,

Thanks for the news, but I'm afraid your press release is misleading
and should be corrected.  You say that T&F is now publishing " fully
Open Access journals", but unless I've misread the licensing
arrangements this simply is not the case.  A fully open access journal
is one that publishes on the web without delay *and* which gives
readers the full set of reuse rights conditioned only on the
requirement that users provide proper attribution.

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001210

T&F's "Open" program and "Open Select" offer pseudo open access.
Could you please explain why T&F needs to reserve substantial reuse
rights after the author or her funder has paid for the costs of
publication?

If your response is that the article processing charge does not
represent the full cost of publication, what charge would?  Why aren't
authors given the option to purchase full open access?

Thanks,

Mike

Michael W. Carroll
Professor of Law and Director,
Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
American University, Washington College of Law
Washington, D.C. 20016