From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 09:42:09 -0400
Given that the OSTP requirements are poorly thought out and yet
another embarrassment for our representative democracy, there is the
intriguing question of whether the publishers would be happier with
their own CHORUS or with the library consortium's SHARE. I myself
would be happier with anything that is not an acronym and does not
require that I have to hit the "shift" key over and over, but that may
be beside the point.
The virtue of CHORUS is its problem: it will work. The publishers
know how to set up things like this. It will be just another business
project, with budgets assembled and responsibility assigned. On the
other hand we have SHARE. Will it work? The track record is not
good. Let's not forget that we have long had in place government
mandates for filing reports on federally funded research. Those
mandates have been honored mostly in the breach.
A cynical publisher might say: Let's fight for CHORUS, but let's make
sure SHARE wins. Then we (the publishers) have the best of all
worlds: the costs of the service will not be ours to bear, the system
will work haphazardly and pose little threat to library subscriptions,
and the blame will lie with others.