From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 04:21:02 +0000

>I too would like to know who walks the walk, and has not caved even
>when Elsevier (or other) publisher has tried to renegotiate with you
>and thrown you a juicy bone?

<snip>

>Who sticks to their principles, and just says very firmly, NO.

There's a problem here, though, and that's the fact that multiple
principles are involved here, and they're in conflict. For example, I
arguably have an obligation to exert market pressure on Elsevier and
thereby (hopefully) influence it to change some of its practices. I also
have an obligation to meet the research needs of my students and faculty
-- many of whom, in order to do their scholarly work, rely on access to
content that is only available from Elsevier. It doesn't appear that I can
stay true to both of those principles simultaneously.

This is something I genuinely struggle with all the time: when trying to
change the world of scholarly communication for the better in the long run
conflicts with meeting the needs of my local scholars in the short run,
how do I resolve that conflict?

---
Rick Anderson
Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections
Marriott Library, University of Utah
[log in to unmask]