From: Jan Velterop <[log in to unmask]> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:18:15 +0100 At the Budapest Open Access Initiative meeting in, well, Budapest, in December 2001, the term Open Access was first agreed upon to describe the sort of free access to scholarly research literature that is needed (it was published in February 2002): “By ‘open access’ to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.” In order to be clear as to the meaning of Open Access in publishing, I propose ditching terms such as 'green', 'gold', 'gratis', 'libre', 'titanium', etcetera, which are confusing at best. I propose using the term "BOAI-compliant Open Access" instead, which would be a lot less ambiguous, and would separate the wheat from the chaff. Jan Velterop On 21 Dec 2011, at 05:39, LIBLICENSE wrote: From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 21:42:57 -0800 Taylor & Francis's program is open access. Michael Carroll's insistence that OA has a special and narrow meaning is one we have heard on this list many times. But OA has many meanings. Advocates of a special kind of OA could have prevented these multiple meanings from arising had they trademarked a term for the variety they prefer. In my view, OA means free to read for the end-user. All the other stipulations are extraneous. Joe Esposito On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:49 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: From: Michael Carroll <[log in to unmask]> Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:20:09 -0500 Dear Jennifer, Thanks for the news, but I'm afraid your press release is misleading and should be corrected. You say that T&F is now publishing " fully Open Access journals", but unless I've misread the licensing arrangements this simply is not the case. A fully open access journal is one that publishes on the web without delay *and* which gives readers the full set of reuse rights conditioned only on the requirement that users provide proper attribution. http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001210 T&F's "Open" program and "Open Select" offer pseudo open access. Could you please explain why T&F needs to reserve substantial reuse rights after the author or her funder has paid for the costs of publication? If your response is that the article processing charge does not represent the full cost of publication, what charge would? Why aren't authors given the option to purchase full open access? Thanks, Mike Michael W. Carroll Professor of Law and Director, Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property American University, Washington College of Law Washington, D.C. 20016