From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 12:06:35 -0400

Harnad writes that "a minority [of publishers] want a one-year
embargo."  I doubt that that is true.  Most publishers are trying to
accommodate the needs and interests of funding agencies, society
members, librarians, and the general public.  I doubt very much that
many publishers are happy with only a one-year embargo. Policies of
this kind represent difficult compromises.

Joe Esposito


On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 8:13 AM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Stevan Harnad <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 10:34:28 -0400
>
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 on Liblicense, LIBLICENSE Ari Belenkiy wrote:
>
> > First, by definition, the Green OA is "a deposit of PRE-peer-reviewed article on author's website".
>
> Incorrect. By definition Green OA is immediate, permanent toll-free
> online access to the post-peer-reviewed "postprint", provided by the
> author (on any website, institutional or central).
>
> > The only way publishers can agree on this is for a back payment - this appears to be made by institutions and not by the authors (a version of the Gold OA).
>
> Nothing of the sort. The majority of journals endorse immediate,
> unembargoed Green OA.
>
> A minority want a 1-year embargo.
>
> The solution is to mandate immediate deposit of all articles; authors
> can then provide immediate Green OA for the majority, and
> Button-mediated "Almost OA" during the embargo for the embargoed
> minority.
>
> No payment for any of this. Publication is already paid for via
> subscriptions, for subscription journals. And Gold OA payments have
> nothing whatsoever to do with any of this.
>
> > Am I right? Then who in the institution will decide for which submission
> > to pay and for which not?
>
> You are wrong. You are conflating preprint and postprint, Green OA and
> Gold OA. I suggest doing a little background reading on basic concepts
> and developments in OA. There's not much, and you will understand it
> quickly once you read about it. But just going by the words in
> postings, and their free associations with what one thinks they might
> mean will not get one anywhere. You might start with the
> self-archiving FAQ.
>
> Stevan Harnad