The publishers' approach with Research Works Act is crass and indefensible. However, what Michael Eisen says is:
"Libraries should cut off their supply of money by canceling subscriptions. And most important, the N.I.H., universities and other public and private agencies that sponsor academic research should make it clear that fulfilling their mission requires that their researchersâ scholarly output be freely available to the public at the moment of publication." In what is this research to be published if the journals are all cancelled? Jump back one line above this quote and the suggestion is in journals "like those published by the Public Library of Science, which I co-founded." Bear in mind this is not the whole BOAI approach to open access (green/gold). Bear in mind this act is not primarily against open access but against the mandates that are speeding up progress to open access (and about the ownership of research works, which we should not overlook either). Any reaction that seeks to cut off green open access is likely to be as damaging as the act itself. The great opportunity this act presents is the wave of new support for open access it appears to have unleashed. Let's not waste that with simple division and out-of-date rhetoric. Focus on the successes of open access (mandates such as NIH and many others including the best open access IRs, Arxiv of course and, yes, PLoS), and make it clear how these new supporters can contribute to continuing that progress. Steve Hitchcock WAIS Group, Building 32 School of Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK Email: [email protected] Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevehit Connotea: http://www.connotea.org/user/stevehit Tel: +44 (0)23 8059 9379 Fax: +44 (0)23 8059 9379 On 11 Jan 2012, at 08:08, Thomas Krichel wrote: > Michael Eisen writes > >> I have an op-ed in today's NYT about the Research Works Act > > Excellent job. > >> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/11/opinion/research-bought-then-paid-for.html > > I especially note > > "Libraries should cut off their supply of money by canceling subscriptions." > > Finally somebody agrees with what I have been saying for years. It > is libraries, rather than publishers or researchers, that hold back > open access. > > Cheers, > > Thomas Krichel http://openlib.org/home/krichel > http://authorprofile.org/pkr1 > skype: thomaskrichel > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
