It's actually worse than that: academic journals in my limited experience
refuse to pay any rights for images and the writer of an article (at least in
the USSA) using images has to submit proof that s/he has secured copyright
permission for reproducing them, which means s/he has to pay for
There is existing research on this:
Crisis in Scholarly
Publishing:http://stanford.edu/~boyd/papers/html/schol_pub_crisis.html
http://stanford.edu/%7Eboyd/papers/html/schol_pub_crisis.html
The Future of Publication:
ei amigo...
Sure. Yet let me say that, pragmatically yours, I can't think of any
insitutions of such size being configured differently, looking at the
place where we live, InI call it Babylon.
yeah, for sure...
You'll find me side by side with all those protesting against the
overwhelming
Subscription rates are extremely high, and increasing, for high profile
journals - which are mostly paid by libraries. The proceeds generally do
not return to the author, they go entirely to the publisher. So the
question is: How much should go to publisher versus author?
Paid by library =
Quoth Marco Ricci:
library.nu), i consider them the heroes of our times, and when i think about
the amount of information freely available to anyone willing to use it, when
i think that i can now learn almost any topic at an academic level, spending
only my own time and energy, i feel moved
You may be interest in this series of videos by Al Bartlett, especially
part 2:
http://www.albartlett.org/presentations/arithmetic_population_energy_video1.html
People use their education for good and bad. The common view is good
education improves quality of life, reduces birth rate, solves
Hello,
This is all very complicated, and I've thought that it may be best, as an
editor of a journal, to stay out of the dialogue, but I think that there are
many good insights stated on nettime--and a few misconceptions.
To some very small degree, editors (I am editor of Feminist Media Studies,
