LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text 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:
Wed, 27 Jun 2012 18:25:15 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (42 lines)
From: Jan Velterop <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:58:22 +0100

In a comment on the Finch Report, Stephen Curry has laid out some
really insightful points:
http://occamstypewriter.org/scurry/2012/06/27/finch-report-the-question-of-costs/

He is optimistic. I share his optimism.

Jan Velterop


On 26 Jun 2012, at 03:28, LIBLICENSE wrote:

> 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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2