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:
Tue, 10 May 2016 21:17:36 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (58 lines)
From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 10:22:04 +0100

As someone who writes on the history of journals and finds it very
difficult to discover lots of what should be easy to find bits of
information, I would love to know more from Ari about Russian journal
publishers and who they pay and what they pay for. In the UK and the
US my own experience is that book authors including contributors of
chapters have usually been paid but journal authors usually have not
been.

Anthony


On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 1:30 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Ari Belenkiy <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 20:27:32 -0700
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> Whatever you mean here, the basic truth is that if publishers would
> have shared their earnings with authors, the picture would have looked
> now quite differently!
>
> Then everyone would speak about outright theft.
>
> The publishers made themselves hated by everyone and now no one cares
> about their feelings.
>
> Why do Russian publishers pay their authors? Why the Western publishers don't?
>
> Anyone on the list can give a history account of this difference?
>
> Ari Belenkiy
>
> Vancouver BC
> Canada
>
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:55 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 09:40:40 -0400
> >
> > If content were all open, we would not recognize the world we live
> > and work in. Is that bad? Not necessarily: different is not
> > inherently bad or good. What troubles me about conversations about
> > "flipping" the economic model for published scholarship is that it
> > assumes that the basic units of content will remain unchanged. But
> > the history of media tells a very different story, that media of all
> > kinds changes when the business ecosystem changes. The business
> > model, in other words, is not something that is wrapped around a
> > piece of content but is a property of that content. This is McLuhan
> > 101. Shouldn't we go back to reading him?
> >
> > Joe Esposito

ATOM RSS1 RSS2