From: "Jean-Claude Guédon" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:10:35 -0400

The problem with "open dialogue" is that it cannot happen. Ask
commercial publishers to remove confidentiality clauses, for example,
and see the reactions. And watch some consortia resist the idea of
opening up the results of negotiations in order, so it is alleged, to
keep good relationships "with the vendors". Canada's CRKN has quite a
history in this regard, as my colleague from Toronto should know.

When one side practises the "divide and conquer" strategy, it is hard
to establish a dialogue.

Jean-Claude Guédon
Professeur titulaire
Littérature comparée
Université de Montréal



Le mardi 14 juillet 2015 à 21:58 -0400, LIBLICENSE a écrit :

From: Robert Glushko <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 01:29:08 +0000

David seems to disagree with me, although I'm not certain I disagree
with him.  Libraries, publishers, academics, can very much have
clashing priorities, and we will not, and I daresay should not, agree
on everything. But we still have much more in common with one another
than we do with large swaths of society and industry.

I very much agree with, and am a proponent of the idea that we need to
have an open dialogue between all interested parties with a mutual
willingness to hear one another out.  If we descend into the
librarians are thieves vs. publishers are rent seekers discord then we
are missing an opportunity to better the system.  It's not a zero sum
game, even if it is a competitive one.