From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 12:52:58 -0400

I quote:

"Support all scientific publishing by public subsidies"

Good luck.

Joe Esposito


On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 11:59 AM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: "Guédon Jean-Claude" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:42:04 -0400
>
> There are indeed important differences between OA economic regimes on
> the Gold road (the Green road is entirely different in this regard as
> it is fully subsidized by institutions that support depositories).
> However, Jo Esposito's elaboration, after starting in the right
> direction, veers off into irrelevance questions for the issue at hand:
> while it is true that knowing who foots the bill is important, the
> embargo issue refers to a second order issue at best, the
> commercialization aspect is a third order issue, etc.
>
> Remember the basic rules:
>
> 1. Research, viewed in its entirety, necessarily includes a publishing
> phase; therefore, publishing is an integral part of research;
>
> 2. Research (as distinguished from development), i.e. fundamental
> research, is financed in great majority by governments, even in the
> USA;
>
> 3. Research has no other business plan than subsidies. In other words,
> although it has been financially viable for several centuries, it has
> never been sustainable in the business sense of the word.
>
> Conclusion:
>
> 1. Do not ask of scientific publishing to be more sustainable than research;
>
> 2. Support all scientific publishing by public subsidies;
>
> 3. Place all scientific publishing on an internationalized system of
> subsidies to ensure editorial autonomy.
>
> Any system of OA publishing that is not free to readers and to
> authors, and that does not allow re-use, mixing, redistribution, etc.,
> automatically recreates the very forms of discrimination that OA is
> supposed to remove.
>
> Jean-Claude Guédon