From: Karin Wikoff <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 11:30:31 +0000 Jenica Rogers at SUNY Potsdam made quite a name for herself by saying No to Elsevier. The money simply wasn't there, so she canceled the subscription. I suspect it was a brave act of desperation. I agree that we are often between a rock and a hard place when any given content provider is the only source for needed resources. Until more critical content can be had elsewhere, it's hard to have any leverage in negotiations. You need to know that you can play hard ball -- that you can walk away if you can't get the concessions you want and need. A lot of times, you can't, and then you haven't much choice about accepting unacceptable terms and prices. The response we got from Elsevier on the subject of "some of our libraries just do not have the money in our budgets" was that we need to convince our administration that we just have to have more money so we can pay for Elsevier. Wow -- are they out of touch with reality. I really appreciated Kevin Smith's blog a while back on Elsevier and OA and the report he included from the perspective of the impact of OA on the shareholder if Elsevier continues their current practice of never backing down from their large profit margins. Worth digging up and reading again as things in the OA world move forward. Karin Wikoff Electronic and Technical Services Librarian Ithaca College Library Ithaca, NY 14850 Email: [log in to unmask] ________________________________________ From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 04:21:02 +0000 >I too would like to know who walks the walk, and has not caved even >when Elsevier (or other) publisher has tried to renegotiate with you >and thrown you a juicy bone? <snip> >Who sticks to their principles, and just says very firmly, NO. There's a problem here, though, and that's the fact that multiple principles are involved here, and they're in conflict. For example, I arguably have an obligation to exert market pressure on Elsevier and thereby (hopefully) influence it to change some of its practices. I also have an obligation to meet the research needs of my students and faculty -- many of whom, in order to do their scholarly work, rely on access to content that is only available from Elsevier. It doesn't appear that I can stay true to both of those principles simultaneously. This is something I genuinely struggle with all the time: when trying to change the world of scholarly communication for the better in the long run conflicts with meeting the needs of my local scholars in the short run, how do I resolve that conflict? --- Rick Anderson Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections Marriott Library, University of Utah [log in to unmask]