From: Stevan Harnad <[log in to unmask]> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 21:07:58 -0400 > From: "Romano, Maria" <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 15:03:17 +0100 "Remaining a fair player, The Royal Society ensures that published open access articles bearing a publication fee are deducted from subscription prices through its Transparent Pricing Mechanism" http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/librarians/transparent_pricing.xhtml" The Royal Society thereby pledges that it will not "double-dip" for hybrid Gold OA. The RS continues to collect subscription fees from institutions worldwide, but whatever additional revenue if gets from individual authors for hybrid Gold OA, it pledges to return as a subscription rebate to all subscribing institutions. ****** But does this mean the RS is a "fair player" insofar as OA is concerned? Hardly. Yet this is not because the hybrid Gold OA rebate amounts to individual authors' full payments for Gold OA subsidizing the subscription costs of institutions worldwide. (The author's own institution only gets back a tiny fraction of its authors' Gold OA fee in its tiny portion of the worldwide subscription rebate.) No. Whether the RS is indeed a fair player depends on whether RS authors have the choice -- between providing Gold OA by paying the RS that additional cost over and above what the world's institutions are already paying the RS in subscriptions -- or providing Green OA at no additional cost, by self-archiving their article free for all online. For if the RS does not give its authors this choice, then it is certainly not a "fair player": It is holding RS authors who want to provide OA hostage to the payment of an additional hybrid Gold OA fee. From 2005 - 2010, the RS has had a checquered history with OA: http://j.mp/RoylSocOA In 2010, however, the RS came down squarely on "the side of the angels", endorsing immediate, unembargoed Green OA self-archiving of the author's final refereed draft: http://j.mp/RSOANGELS But now -- perhaps -- the RS seems to have adopted a 12-month embargo on Green OA (under the fell influence -- perhaps -- of the new Finch/RCUK OA policy?): "You are free to post…the “Author Generated Postprint” - Your personal copy of the revised version of the Article as accepted by Us… on Your personal or institutional web site and load it onto an institutional or not for profit repository no earlier than 12 months from the date of first publication of the Definitive Published Version." http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/licence.xhtml Or is this just another (silly) attempt to distinguish between authors positing on their "institutional website" (unembargoed) versus posting in their "institutional repository" (embargoed) -- in which case RS authors can happily ignore this empty pseudo-distinction, knowing that their institutional repository is indeed their institutional website. But the RS would do itself a historic favour if it dropped all this double-talk, unworthy of such a venerable institution, and lived up to its decree that: "In keeping with its role as the UK's national academy of science, The Royal Society<http://royalsociety.org/> is committed to the widest possible dissemination of research outputs." by ceasing to try to hold Green OA self-archiving hostage to sustaining the RS's subscription revenues at all costs. There will be time for the RS to go Gold at a fair, affordable, sustainable price, single-paid instead of over-charged and double-paid, as now (with or without double-dipping) -- after Green has prevailed worldwide and made subscriptions no longer unsustainable. But that will be post-Green Fair-Gold. What the RS (and other publishers, less venerable) are trying to use OA embargoes for today is to force authors to pay pre-emptively for pre-Green Fools-Gold, so as to ensure that their revenue streams do not shrink either way. But shrink they must, because post-Green the only service the RS or any other research journal publisher will need to perform is the management of peer review in the online era. And that only costs a fraction of what they are being paid now, with or without double dipping. The RS "Membership Programme" -- like all hybrid Fools-Gold, is a Trojan Horse: http://j.mp/TRoaJan On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 7:02 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > From: "Romano, Maria" <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 15:03:17 +0100 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > The Royal Society welcomes leading institutions to its Open Access Membership Programme > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The growing number of members since its launch early last year > demonstrates the success of the Royal Society’s Open Access Membership > Programme<http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/librarians/membership.xhtml>, > as University of Cambridge, MIT and The University of Melbourne have > joined the programme along with 30 other institutions → > <http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/librarians/allmembers.xhtml>. > > The programme enables participating organisations to decrease the cost > of the article processing charge to their authors by 25%, along with > further promoting its open access publications and research output. > > Institutions choosing to affiliate themselves to the prestigious > charity and support its open access initiatives can find out more by > visiting our membership > webpages<http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/librarians/membership.xhtml>. > > For more information on how your institution can support its > researchers with discounted open access article processing charges, > please contact [log in to unmask] > > In keeping with its role as the UK's national academy of science, The > Royal Society<http://royalsociety.org/> is committed to the widest > possible dissemination of research outputs. Hence since 2006, any > article can be published in open access under a Creative Commons > license<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/> in any of its > prestigious journals<http://royalsocietypublishing.org/journals>, > including the fully gold journal Open > Biology<http://rsob.royalsocietypublishing.org/>. > > Remaining a fair player, The Royal Society ensures that published open > access articles bearing a publication fee are deducted from > subscription prices through its Transparent Pricing Mechanism > <http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/librarians/transparent_pricing.xhtml>. [SNIP]