From: David Prosser <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:58:54 +0100
Joe
Research university X already gives away its intellectual property and
then spends much more than non-research universities in buying access
to the intellectual property of other research universities. Where's
the strategic thinking there?
And of course, a lot of the research done isn't paid for by the
universities themselves - it's paid for by research funders such as
NIH in the US and the Research Councils in the UK. For the NIH to
ensure that NIH-funded researcher in University N has access to
research outputs generated by NIH-funded researcher at University M
looks to me the epitome of strategic thinking.
David
On 23 Jun 2012, at 04:00, LIBLICENSE wrote:
> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 11:31:12 -0700
>
> It's really troubling to see all these discussions taking place as
> though the only thing that matters is short-term cost and revenue
> projections. Does everyone really think the world does not change
> from time to time? It is simply not in a research university's
> interest to support OA, green, gold, or any other flavor. Most
> research is produced at a small number of institutions; OA is in the
> interest of organizations (most colleges and universities, the
> corporate sector, and government and NGOs) that don't produce the
> research. There is a total absence of strategic thinking here.
>
> So what's the scenario? Major research university X gives away its
> intellectual property and then cuts faculty for lack of funding.
> Ridiculous.
>
> Joe Esposito
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> From: Richard Poynder <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:19:29 +0100
>>
>> An interview with the Vice-Provost (Research) at University College
>> London, Professor David Price.
>>
>> Some quotes:
>>
>> "Economic modelling shows that, for research universities, the Green
>> route to OA is more cost effective than the Gold. Under Gold Research
>> Councils and Universities will have to find millions of pounds in
>> existing budgets to fund OA charges. That means that some things will
>> have to stop to make the necessary monies available."
>>
>> "The Finch recommendations are not good news for the Humanities, whose
>> unit of publication is characteristically the research monograph. Who
>> will publish Gold OA monographs, and who will pay for them?"
>>
>> "The result of the Finch recommendations would be to cripple
>> university systems with extra expense. Finch is certainly a cure to
>> the problem of access, but is it not a cure which is actually worse
>> than the disease?"
>>
>> "What Finch should have done is to model Green and Gold together, to
>> see which works out cheaper. A forthcoming report from the JISC's Open
>> Access Implementation Group on the impact of APC charges on
>> universities does this - and comes up with a different scenario to
>> Finch."
>>
>> David Price's message to UK Minister for Universities and Science
>> David Willetts: "Listen to UCL's response to Finch and carry on
>> talking to get the best transitional model from where we are now to a
>> fully OA world. The Finch recommendations are only part of the
>> answer."
>>
>> More here:
>>
>> http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/finch-report-ucls-david-price-responds.html
|
