From: "Jean-Claude Guédon" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:10:35 -0400 The problem with "open dialogue" is that it cannot happen. Ask commercial publishers to remove confidentiality clauses, for example, and see the reactions. And watch some consortia resist the idea of opening up the results of negotiations in order, so it is alleged, to keep good relationships "with the vendors". Canada's CRKN has quite a history in this regard, as my colleague from Toronto should know. When one side practises the "divide and conquer" strategy, it is hard to establish a dialogue. Jean-Claude Guédon Professeur titulaire Littérature comparée Université de Montréal Le mardi 14 juillet 2015 à 21:58 -0400, LIBLICENSE a écrit : From: Robert Glushko <[log in to unmask]> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 01:29:08 +0000 David seems to disagree with me, although I'm not certain I disagree with him. Libraries, publishers, academics, can very much have clashing priorities, and we will not, and I daresay should not, agree on everything. But we still have much more in common with one another than we do with large swaths of society and industry. I very much agree with, and am a proponent of the idea that we need to have an open dialogue between all interested parties with a mutual willingness to hear one another out. If we descend into the librarians are thieves vs. publishers are rent seekers discord then we are missing an opportunity to better the system. It's not a zero sum game, even if it is a competitive one.