Am 13.03.13 07:52, schrieb Richard Poynder:
"RUP has no current plans to become an OA publisher, ....
As a publisher of "selective" journals, our cost per article is
higher than the current standards for APCs for immediate access,
even the $5,000 fee that is now charged by some journals."
A non-OA publisher, which seems to suffer from/enjoys ridiculous
cost/income per article should not be given voice in this discussion.
There are simply journals which can ask whatever they want (money,
rights,..) and will get it (Nature, Science,...)
_Forget about them_ - as long as the authors may publish their
manuscripts with an embargo of 6/12 months max.
And the authors should retain (from their publishers / by law) the
right to put whatever license on those manuscripts.
Regarding CC-BY-NC and RUP's assertion that "it still achieves the
funding agencies' goal of reuse of content for text and data mining."
I wonder wether it is true for, say, Google (Scholar)? If I put an
*explicit* NC clause in any license on a web resource: may Google
index and list it? Only on pages *not* enhancing their revenue, i.e.
without advertising? Or not on any of their pages, since money loosing
services may still enhance the brand ...
I think only specialized lawyers can answer that - and then probably
just for one jurisdiction. Is RUP's Rossner a specialist of that kind?
On how many jurisdictions? Or is it just wishful thinking on his part,
because he wants to maintain maximum control over what publishers see
as their property?
Hans
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
