I would like to support Stevan on this.
The concepts of relative autonomy of the scientific community (Robert K. Merton)
and of symbolic capital (Pierre Bourdieu) have been designed by these
sociologists of science precisely to show that economic matters, if they appear
at all in scientific matters, and research more generally, do so in a translated
mode that is largely controlled by the values and rules of engagement of these
communities. This is the reason why scientists can still pursue problems of no
direct economic interest. This is what Merton called the scientific ethos
(communalism, disinterestedness, organized skepticism, etc..)
Commercial journals got involved in this process late in the game, and they
became dominant even later (after the 60's). They are the only ones having
something to do with the scientific process that speak from a strictly economic
perspective, and that has messed up the process quite a bit, alas.
Jean-Claude Guédon
--
Jean-Claude Guédon
Professeur titulaire
Littérature comparée
Université de Montréal
Le lundi 07 novembre 2011 à 07:04 -0500, Stevan Harnad a écrit :
On 2011-11-07, at 3:30 AM, Allen Kleiman wrote:
Authors do not write for free.Â
1. Publication = Tenure = Promotion = Money!
2. Publication = Prestige = Speaking Engagements =
Money!
3. Publication = Professorships = Money!
4. and etc.
Not a single penny of that Money is paid to authors by *publishers*,
in exchange for being *given* their paper, cost-free, to go ahead
and sell. So it is *completely* irrelevant. That is the point you
keep missing in your analogy to auto re-sale.
When you sell a car that you designed and built to a vendor, the
vendor pays you for it, in exchange for the right to sell it to
someone else. If you happen to win an award for the auto design from
your design institute, *that's not the vendor paying you for the
right to sell your car.*
The only essential service a journal provides is the one you kept
referring to as "verification of its reliability and safety by two
or three mechanics of questionable qualifications and skill
[likewise for free]" -- Yet it's in exchange for that [peer
review]-- and not for cash -- that authors give publishers their
paper to sell, royalty-free.
Green Open Access to the author's refereed final draft online is
provided by the author as a supplement, so that his paper's research
uptake, usage, citations and impact (which are what generate the
Tenure, Promotion, Prestige, Speaking Engagements, Professorships --
and research progress) can be provided by *all* its would-be users,
not only by those whose institutions can afford to subscribe to the
publisher's version of record.
Scrap the car-sale analogy. It simply does not fit the subtle and
unique case of refereed research publication of impact-seeking (not
royalty-seeking) work.
Stevan Harnad
On 2011-11-06, at 4:08 PM, Allen Kleiman wrote:
Is this a matter of 'commerce'?
Yes indeed, but definitely not commerce along the lines of the
analogy you describe below:
Suppose I own a car and [1] offer it for sale to a
rental company with [2] the verification of its
reliability and safety by two or three mechanics of
questionable qualifications and skill. However, [3] I
want to include a condition of sale that the buyer will
make the car available to all the poor people in my town
for free since they can't afford to pay for the rental.
Â
When a Publisher offers to print an article -- certified
by referees of questionable repute -- and [4] absorbs
the cost of publication, distribution, and etc., isn't
he entitled to [5] retain the rights of sale?
Now let me count the myriad ways your analogy fails:
 [1] offer [car] for sale: No, authors don't sell but give their
paper to the publisher. They don't ask or get a penny in return.
 [2] verification of [car's] reliability: The referees, too, offer
their services for free -- but to the publisher, not the author.
 [3] condition[s] of sale: No sale, no sale conditions. Author gives
the paper to the publisher for free.
[4] cost of publication, distribution, and etc.  In exchange for
managing and certifying the outcome of the refereeing ("by referees
of questionable repute"), the author gives the publisher is given
all rights to sell, on paper or online.
[5] retain the rights of sale:Â Â In exchange for managing and
certifying the outcome of the refereeing ("by referees of
questionable repute"), the author gives the publisher is given all
rights to sell, on paper or online.
In addition, the author simply places a free copy of the author's
final draft ("certified by referees of questionable repute") online
for those who cannot afford to pay for access to the publisher's
version of record, on paper or online.
That's Green OA.
