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:
Thu, 1 Oct 2015 19:39:35 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
From: Ari Belenkiy <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:40:22 -0700

Let me humbly remark that Soviet model remunerated the authors while
the gold OA initiated by Vitek Tracz robs them of money! Moreover, the
latter model tilts balance toward mediocre papers whose authors are
able to pay the "entrance" fees.

But the most tricky word in all this discussion about OA is
"customers". Who are they - those who need to read a host of newly
published medical articles  immediately and free of charge?

I suspect they are rich elderly folks who are seeking immediate cure
for their life threatening diseases. They are the major beneficiaries
of OA. It is for their health and sake OA came to destroy the
traditional publishing routine. They need their doctors be able to
access any innovation in the medical field.  They are not sure their
doctors would be eager to pay to read the article. So they need them
free. And immediately.

The authors so far are the "martyrs" of OA. Before the OA era, the
authors did not have a "privilege" of paying fees - the libraries of
their institutions paid the price of being acquainted with the latest
research via subscriptions.  Now, with gold OA model and a host of
authors who subscribed to it, the libraries seem to have to pay less
than earlier. But is it so?  The money to the libraries always came
and come from the student fees. Do we see the tuition fees went down
by at least one buck after introduction of OA?

Asking all the questions in the last several years, I got a standard
answer that the "gold OA" is "profanation" of a "true" OA, which is...
"green OA". Let me again remark that the "green OA" is non-sense and
no publisher will ever embrace it wholeheartedly. Those of them who
halfheartedly did this (to avoid an outcry from the liberal vociferous
university folks) smartly introduced a so-called "embargo period",
which effectively kills the very idea of OA.

Except for the negative sides of OA already mentioned here by others,
I cannot see any positive result from OA. True, I am not sure that
Vitek Trasz must be blamed for this outcome.

Ari Belenkiy, PhD

Vancouver BC

ATOM RSS1 RSS2