From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 07:01:48 -0700

Many, many good reasons for research information to be open access
(and counter-reasons as well), but the idea that research publications
will increase support of the academic enterprise is the least
persuasive.  Any one ever look at a journal article in a field where
you have no training?  If you stacked print copies of every journal in
ScienceDirect on the corner of Madison and 57th and gave them away for
free, they would still be there at the end of the day, putting aside
those used by people picking up after their dogs.  Many, many good
reasons to make research findings available to a wider public, but the
form of those communications has to change fundamentally.  Sorry,
David, but you can cancel my free subscription to "Letters in
Mathematical Physics."

Joe Esposito

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:18 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: David Goodman <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 23:59:24 -0400
>
> To the extent that the general public cannot see the research that the
> elite institutions are doing, and to the extent other parts of society
> have difficulty in obtaining and using the research, the elite
> institutions  will lose their base of support. This is already
> happening in the US, and probably will soon be elsewhere.  Failure of
> any academic or research institution takes to ensure that its work is
> widely noticed is the road to long term disaster.
>
> To anticipate an objection, that was "see" and "noticed" -- not
> necessarily "understood."     But it's the first step towards
> understanding. The basic e argument for Open Access is to increase the
> public's knowledge, respect, and understanding for science and
> scholarship, and its realization of the power of the scientific
> method. To the extent this is not realized, it is not only the elite
> institutions but the rest of the world also that will that face
> disaster.  Open Access is about more than publishing.
>
> David Goodman
>
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:00 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 11:31:12 -0700
> >
> > It's really troubling to see all these discussions taking place as
> > though the only thing that matters is short-term cost and revenue
> > projections.  Does everyone really think the world does not change
> > from time to time?  It is simply not in a research university's
> > interest to support OA, green, gold, or any other flavor.  Most
> > research is produced at a small number of institutions; OA is in the
> > interest of organizations (most colleges and universities, the
> > corporate sector, and government and NGOs) that don't produce the
> > research.  There is a total absence of strategic thinking here.
> >
> > So what's the scenario?  Major research university X gives away its
> > intellectual property and then cuts faculty for lack of funding.
> > Ridiculous.
> >
> > Joe Esposito