On 26 Dec 2003 at 13:12, Alexei Koudinov wrote: > I do claim that the low-cost technology is available and that the > community just need to be educated about it. When this is achieved > not-for-profit journals will be run with no technical quality compromise > (scholar excellence/quality was always an editorial-not publisher- duty) > by scientists with NO need to "recover their [low] costs by charging the > author-institution for each outgoing article they publish". Such journals > operation may well be supported by small grants (with no budgeting for > <http://www.plos.org/support/launchparties.html>promotional lanch parties > in several countries that multi-million grant to PLoS could itemize) > or Institutional/Library budgets.
I agree. There are many institutions that will be happy to run such journals, and they will always find the little money that is needed. Running such a journal will add to their prestige and getting a grant for such a purpose should not be a problem. > "Open access" is ethics, not business model of "charging the author or > institution" for article publication. Failure to appreciate the above > in my view indicate an unfair bias that will be used against Open Access > movement by those opposing it Exactly. "Charging the author or institution" opens a way to setting up a beaurocracy that will take costs higher and higher. The author or the author's institution have already paid - but their work to prepare the publication. Why should they pay even more in order to give others "free access?" I see no logic in such an approach. Arkadiusz Jadczyk http://www.cassiopaea.org/quantum_future/homepage.htm
