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