Hi David,

What I really liked about the Finch Report is that it points a way forward that 
can enable different stakeholders to work together constructively to widen 
access.  Changes would be required from all stakeholders, but we would all get 
further faster by working together.  I know it will be controversial, perhaps 
especially so on this list, but is it perhaps time to explore opportunities to 
work with publishers?

With kind wishes,

Alicia

Dr Alicia Wise
Director of Universal Access
Elsevier I The Boulevard I Langford Lane I Kidlington I Oxford I OX5 1GB
M: +44 (0) 7823 536 826 I E: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Twitter: @wisealic


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
David Prosser
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:31 AM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Why should publishers agree to Green OA?

Laurent makes an important point.  OA policies are between the funders or 
institutions and the researchers.  These agreements come before any agreement 
regarding copyright assignment between authors and publishers.  So, it is the 
job of publishers to decide if they are willing to live with the deposit 
agreement between the funder/institution and researchers, not the job of 
funders and institutions to limit their policies to match the needs of 
publishers.

David


On 20 Jun 2012, at 11:04, Laurent Romary wrote:


Not that I know. I think the French Research Performing Organizations are not 
planning to put negotiation with editors as a premise to defining their own OA 
policy.
Laurent


Le 20 juin 2012 à 11:45, Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF) a écrit :


Hi Laurent,

Institutions already do have agreements with publishers via their libraries 
and/or library consortia.  This is certainly the case for INRIA.

With kind wishes,

Alicia

From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 
[mailto:[email protected]]<mailto:[mailto:[email protected]]> On 
Behalf Of Laurent Romary
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 9:11 AM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Why should publishers agree to Green OA?

This definitely makes no sense. Institutions are not going to start negotiating 
agreements with all publishers one by one. Does Elsevier have so much man power 
left to start negotiating with all institutions one by one as well. The 
corresponding budget could then probably used to reduce subscriptions prices ;-)
Laurent

Le 20 juin 2012 à 09:53, Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF) a écrit :



Hi all,

Just a quick point of clarification.... Elsevier doesn't forbid posting if 
there is a mandate.  We ask for an agreement with the institution that has the 
mandate, and there is no cost for these agreements.  The purpose of these 
agreements is to work out a win-win solution to find a way for the underlying 
journals in which academics choose to publish to be sustainable even if there 
are high posting rates.

With kind wishes,

Alicia

Dr Alicia Wise
Director of Universal Access
Elsevier I The Boulevard I Langford Lane I Kidlington I Oxford I OX5 1GB
M: +44 (0) 7823 536 826 I E: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Twitter: @wisealic



From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 
[mailto:[email protected]]<mailto:[mailto:[email protected]]> On 
Behalf Of Peter Murray-Rust
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 7:23 PM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: [GOAL] Why should publishers agree to Green OA?


I have some simple questions about Green OA. I don't know the answers.

* is there any *contractual* relationship between a Green-publisher and any 
legal body? Or is Green simply a permission granted unilaterally by publishers 
when they feel like it, and withdrawable when they don't.
* if Green starts impacting on publishers' revenues (and I understand this is 
part of the Green strategy - when we have 100% Green then publishers will have 
to change) what stops them simply withdrawing the permission? Or rationing it? 
Or any other anti-Green measure
* Do publishers receive any funding from anywhere for allowing Green? Green is 
extra work for them - why should they increase the amount they do?
* Is there any body which regularly "negotiates" with publishers such as ACS, 
who categorically forbid Green for now and for ever.

Various publishers seem to indicate that they will allow Green as long as it's 
a relatively small percentage. But, as Stevan has noted, if your institution 
mandates Green, then Elsevier forbids it. So I cannot see why, if Green were to 
reach - say - 50%, the publishers wouldn't simply ration it and prevent 100%.


--
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069

Elsevier Limited. Registered Office: The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, 
Oxford, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom, Registration No. 1982084 (England and Wales).



_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Laurent Romary
INRIA & HUB-IDSL
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>




Elsevier Limited. Registered Office: The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, 
Oxford, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom, Registration No. 1982084 (England and Wales).



_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Laurent Romary
INRIA & HUB-IDSL
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>



<ATT00001..txt>


Elsevier Limited. Registered Office: The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, 
Oxford, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom, Registration No. 1982084 (England and Wales).

_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Reply via email to