Re: [GOAL] North, South, and Open Access: The view from Egypt with Mahmoud Khalifa

...@protonmail.com Sent from Jan Velterop's iPhone. Please excuse for brevity and typos. > On 25 Apr 2018, at 13:41, Chris Zielinski <ch...@chriszielinski.com> wrote: > > Regarding the comments of David Prosser and Jan Velterop, I would note that > for researchers working on health services

[GOAL] Re: Quo vadere?

is what many publishers fear most. Of course, if the idea of pay-per-view instead of subscriptions gains traction, you may see article viewing fees go up. Jan Velterop Sent from Jan Velterop's iPhone. Please excuse for brevity and typos. > On 4 Jan 2016, at 23:19, Arthur S

[GOAL] Re: Need for a new beginning

All I want to say is that I agree wholeheartedly with Chris. He definitely isn't the only one to be outraged. Johannes (Jan) J M Velterop Sent from Jan Velterop's iPhone. Please excuse for brevity and typos. > On 3 Oct 2015, at 11:32, Chris Zielinski wrote: > > I

[GOAL] Re: [BOAI] Re: a chronology about open access

This sort of insistence on One Special License is exactly what is limiting the adoption of open access. Really? Any evidence? I'd welcome it if your definition of open access found universal acceptance. Would be a great step forward. Jan Velterop On 22 Jun 2015, at 12:34, Stephen Downes

[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals

needs to stop. Jan Velterop On 1 May 2015, at 13:47, Jacinto Dávila jacinto.dav...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Éric. Very nice examples. However, I still wonder if there is some intrinsic value in the concept of journal that one may miss. A journal is not just a collection of papers. Maybe

[GOAL] Re: Elsevier (and other traditional publishers) and PLOS

by publishers. Prepublication peer review can perfectly well be arranged by academics themselves. See this: http://blog.scienceopen.com/2015/04/welcome-jan-velterop-peer-review-by-endorsement/ Jan Velterop Sent from Jan Velterop's iPhone. Please excuse for brevity and typos. On 1 May 2015, at 10

[GOAL] Re: The Life and Death of an Open Access Journal: QA with Librarian Marcus Banks

An ideal candidate for this approach, I woud have thought: http://theparachute.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/journals-of-nature-and-science.html http://theparachute.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/journals-of-nature-and-science.html Jan Velterop On 31 Mar 2015, at 13:20, Richard Poynder richard.poyn

[GOAL] Re: Scopus and gold OA: open2closed, is this what we want?

On 13 Oct 2014, at 15:29, Heather Morrison heather.morri...@uottawa.ca wrote: Elsevier's for-pay Scopus service includes More than 20,000 peer-reviewed journals, including 2,800 gold open access journals from: http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/scopus/content-overview 14% of the

[GOAL] Re: Paperity launched. The 1st multidisciplinary aggregator of OA journals papers

On 12 Oct 2014, at 12:51, Stevan Harnad har...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: Harvesting Gold OA journal articles is a piece of cake. Indeed. Not just for Paperity, but for anybody else. It's one of the attractions and benefits of open access via the 'gold' route. Another is that most articles can

[GOAL] Re: The dramatic growth of BioMedCentral's open access article processing charges

, too, which I won't go into right now). However, without submission fees, APCs that vary with selectiveness of the journal are pretty much inevitable. The differences may well become greater than they currently are. Jan Velterop On 28 Feb 2014, at 13:50, Heather Morrison heather.morri

[GOAL] Re: The dramatic growth of BioMedCentral's open access article processing charges

. In many ways, it would be better if publishers stayed out of the peer review process altogether, as I have argued here: http://theparachute.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/essence-of-academic-publishing.html Best, Jan Velterop On 28 Feb 2014, at 14:35, Bo-Christer Björk bo-christer.bj...@hanken.fi wrote

[GOAL] Re: A reply to Professor Carroll

(particularly journal) publishing that's fit for purpose, monetising copyright is the wrong method. Jan Velterop On 8 Feb 2014, at 14:05, CHARLES OPPENHEIM c.oppenh...@btinternet.com wrote: Professor Carroll has withdrawn his misinterpretation of what I said. I thank him for that. He argues

[GOAL] Re: Charles Oppenheim on who owns the rights to scholarly articles

Sally, Percentages, unfortunately, don't always mean much. I haven't read the Cox Cox report, but it would be interesting to know if the four largest publishers – less than half a percent of publishers, yet together having a market share of perhaps as much as two thirds of the scholarly

[GOAL] Re: ROARMAP: Microsoft Research Adopts Green Open Access Self-Archiving and Copyright Reservation Policy

At least some articles with Microsoft Research affiliated authors are covered under a CC-BY licence, so could be called true open access (BOAI-compliant OA). Example: http://www.plosone.org/article/authors/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0072200 Jan Velterop On 21 Jan 2014, at 13:37

[GOAL] Re: [SCHOLCOMM] More Skulduggery from the Scholarly Scullery: Sore Losers

On 29 Dec 2013, at 01:18, Stevan Harnad amscifo...@gmail.com wrote: (2) And once they become big and successful one is also struck by how the differences between the OA publishers and the subscription publishers shrink (both for for-profit OA publishers like Springer/BMC and not-for-profits

[GOAL] Fwd: Institutions: Ignore Elsevier Take-Down Notices (and Mandate Immediate-Deposit)

, and are to be preferred. Some more thoughts on this here: http://theparachute.blogspot.nl/2013/12/lo-fun-and-hi-fun.html Jan Velterop Begin forwarded message: From: Stevan Harnad amscifo...@gmail.com Subject: Institutions: Ignore Elsevier Take-Down Notices (and Mandate Immediate-Deposit

[GOAL] Re: Fwd: Institutions: Ignore Elsevier Take-Down Notices (and Mandate Immediate-Deposit)

On 20 Dec 2013, at 18:12, Peter Murray-Rust pm...@cam.ac.uk wrote: There are two separate issues here. On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Jan Velterop velte...@gmail.com wrote: Elsevier's (or at least Tom Reller's) response is as expected, though it does show an apparent – mistaken IMO

[GOAL] Re: Jeffrey Beall Needlessly Compromises CredibilityofBeall's List

with the overall course needed to reach the destination. In the larger picture, OA itself is but a means, of course. To the goal of optimal scholarly knowledge exchange. And so on, Russian doll like. But that's a different discussion, I think Jan Velterop On 12 Dec 2013, at 12:03, Sally

[GOAL] Re: Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu

On 10 Dec 2013, at 13:05, Peter Murray-Rust pm...@cam.ac.uk wrote: Elsevier are the worst offender that I have investigated, followed by Springer who took all my Open Access images, badged them as (C) SpringerImages and offered them for resale at 60 USD per image. Just because OA is only

[GOAL] Re: Pre-publication peer review (was: Jeffrey Beall Needlessly Compromises Credibility of Beall's List)

William Gunn for that phrase), so I won't hold my breath. Jan Velterop On 10 Dec 2013, at 13:36, Sally Morris sa...@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk wrote: At the risk (nay, certainty) of being pilloried by OA conformists, let me say that – whatever ithe failings of his article – I thank Jeffrey Beall

[GOAL] Re: Jeffrey Beall Needlessly Compromises Credibility of Beall's List

perhaps he explained his choice and have I missed that passage. On the other hand, perhaps he chose open access in order to reach the widest possible audience. Just like open access advocates would. It may be his first (subconscious?) step on the path to join the 'movement'. Jan Velterop On 9 Dec

[GOAL] Re: [SCHOLCOMM] Unanimity (Re: Monographs)

for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Jan Velterop On 26 Nov 2013, at 06:50, Andrew A. Adams a...@meiji.ac.jp wrote: Rick

[GOAL] Re: Paid Gold vs. Free Gold

Are there examples of such subscription journals that make their online version freely accessible online (immediately upon publication). Who would subscribe, and what would a subscription entail? Jan Velterop On 19 Apr 2013, at 05:16, Stevan Harnad amscifo...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Apr 18

[GOAL] Re: Paid Gold vs. Free Gold

InterScience user account: login above and proceed to purchase the article. New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article. No indication at all of it being a journal that makes its online version freely accessible online immediately upon publication. Jan Velterop On 19 Apr

[GOAL] Re: CC-BY-NC (was: Is $99 per article realistic and compatible with, profits - or too high a price?)

-censorship, any re-use is best avoided. That in turn means that the article with a CC-BY-NC licence is not truly BOAI-compliant open access, but merely 'ocular access' instead. Unsatisfactory for modern research and scholarship. Jan Velterop On 29 Jan 2013, at 09:55, Editor Living Reviews wrote

[GOAL] Re: Further Fallout From Finch Folly

to — and paying for — journals without duly checking the journals' credentials are probably too gullible to expect to produce much worthwhile publishable science anyway. It's a harsh world, the scientific one. Jan Velterop On 19 Dec 2012, at 05:51, Stevan Harnad wrote: On 2012-12-18, at 8:26 PM

[GOAL] Re: Interview with Harvard's Stuart Shieber

Alma, the 60% of green journals without embargoes you mention, what percentage of annual green published articles do they represent (not counting gold articles, which are of course also green by definition)? Best, Jan Johannes (Jan) J M Velterop AQnowledge - Concept Web Alliance M +44 7525

[GOAL] Re: Squashing the brand? Re: Interview with the Scholarly Kitchen's Kent Anderson

of journals — and the concomitant fragmentation it entails — will be more of a hindrance than a help. Initiatives such as nanopublications (http://nanopub.org) and, in the field of pharmacology, OpenPHACTS (http://www.openphacts.org), are the harbingers of change. Jan Velterop On 9 Nov 2012

[GOAL] Re: Squashing the brand? Re: Interview with the Scholarly Kitchen's Kent Anderson

of content that's not OA, but under the same 'brand', which stands for a level of credibility of the peer-review and publication practice. The value of brands is often overrated, though. Jan Velterop On 8 Nov 2012, at 12:06, Steve Hitchcock wrote: Having feasted on Kent Anderson's anti-OA, anti

[GOAL] Re: [Open-access] Re: Hitler, Mother Teresa, and Coke

to be tested against the current situation before being considered still valid. Jan Velterop On 7 Nov 2012, at 10:17, Sally Morris wrote: It's along time ago now, but Alma Swan and Sheridan Brown surveyed nearly 11,000 scholarly authors for ALPSP in 1998/9 and received 3 218 replies. 33% put

[GOAL] Re: R Poynder Interviews I Gibson About 2004 UK Select Committee Green OA Mandate Recommendation

. Giving up authors' preferred journals in favour of pure Gold OA journals was what (I think) BMC's Vitek Tracz and Jan Velterop had been lobbying for at the time (and that is not what the Gibson Report ended up recommending)! Emily Commander. So I think if you really want to get

[GOAL] Re: R Poynder Interviews I Gibson About 2004 UK Select Committee Green OA Mandate Recommendation

On 28 Oct 2012, at 23:07, Stevan Harnad wrote: Giving up authors' preferred journals in favour of pure Gold OA journals was what (I think) BMC's Vitek Tracz and Jan Velterop had been lobbying for at the time Stevan may think so, but that doesn't make it correct or accurate. What we

[GOAL] Re: R Poynder Interviews I Gibson About 2004 UK Select Committee Green OA Mandate Recommendation

. Jan On 29 Oct 2012, at 10:34, Richard Poynder wrote: On 28 Oct 2012, at 23:07, Stevan Harnad wrote: Giving up authors' preferred journals in favour of pure Gold OA journals was what (I think) BMC's Vitek Tracz and Jan Velterop had been lobbying for at the time Stevan may think so

[GOAL] Re: R Poynder Interviews I Gibson About 2004 UK Select Committee Green OA Mandate Recommendation

Poynder From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Jan Velterop Sent: 29 October 2012 11:07 To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: R Poynder Interviews I Gibson About 2004 UK Select Committee Green OA Mandate Recommendation

[GOAL] Re: Gold OA: Publication costs and journal impact factors

Factor at all. Jan Velterop On 12 Oct 2012, at 16:30, ANDREW Theo wrote: Hi Ross and others, Apologies – friday afternoon gremlins have crept into our blogging platform breaking the link. Here’s a sanitised extract of the data: Price range JIF Range JIF Mean JIF Median Number

[GOAL] Re: Springer for sale - implications for open access?

century BC, has been libraries. You seem to have an extraordinary lack of any trust in the publishing and legal system. Jan Velterop On 11 Oct 2012, at 02:32, Heather Morrison wrote: On 10-Oct-12, at 2:58 PM, David Prosser wrote: ...The simple fact is that the Springer OA articles

[GOAL] Re: On the proposal to raise the Green OA goalpost fromGratis to CC-BY

be reliably attributed, not only to the author, but also to the journal from which they were mined. Several developments are well underway in that regard: http://www.openphacts.org/ and http://nanopub.org/wordpress/ are some examples. Jan Velterop And I will state again that for my purposes

[GOAL] Re: On the proposal to raise the Green OA goalpost fromGratis to CC-BY

, emphatically yes. Mandating it, no. (iii) I'm not aware of anybody advocating mandates for 'gold' OA. Examples, please, if you have them. Preferences, yes. Mandates, no. (iv) See (iii). Jan Velterop On 10 Oct 2012, at 22:27, Stevan Harnad wrote: On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Jan Velterop velte

[GOAL] Re: RE : Re: On the proposal to raise the Green OA goalpost fromGratis to CC-BY

agree with you on it being a tough question. Best, Jean-Claude Best, Jan Velterop Le mercredi 10 octobre 2012 à 21:53 +0100, Jan Velterop a écrit : Jean-Claude, I get that. But I have a question that I don't think has been answered yet. I'll phrase the question

[GOAL] Re: CC-BY in repositories

thing I'm not clear about is who the we all are who'd have to agree to launch this for Open Access week :-) Jan Velterop On 9 Oct 2012, at 22:28, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Jan Velterop velte...@gmail.com wrote: There is an inconsistency here, either way. We've

[GOAL] Re: CC-BY in repositories

it provides any precedent or lead in this respect. Steve On 10 Oct 2012, at 12:15, Jan Velterop wrote: Peter, It would simplify things a lot. So, the norm would be (mandated where needed) to deposit one's final manuscript, accepted for publication after peer-review, with a CC

[GOAL] Re: On the proposal to raise the Green OA goalpost from Gratis to CC-BY

. The destination of the ship I'm on was mapped out at the BOAI in December 2001. I find it important to stay on course. The trouble arises where he regards the course of the ship that I am on as a threat to the course of his ship. That is misguided. Jan Velterop On 10 Oct 2012, at 14:49

[GOAL] Re: RE : Re: On the proposal to raise the Green OA goalpost fromGratis to CC-BY

-Claude Guédon Message d'origine De: goal-boun...@eprints.org de la part de Jan Velterop Date: mer. 10/10/2012 12:07 À: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Cc: SPARC Open Access Forum; BOAI Forum Objet : [GOAL] Re: On the proposal to raise the Green OA goalpost

[GOAL] Re: RE : Re: RE : Re: On the proposal to raise the Green OA goalpost fromGratis to CC-BY

part de Jan Velterop Date: mer. 10/10/2012 13:51 À: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Cc: SPARC Open Access Forum; BOAI Forum Objet : [GOAL] Re: RE : Re: On the proposal to raise the Green OA goalpost fromGratis to CC-BY Jean-Claude, Does this mean that you think trying

[GOAL] Re: CC-BY in repositories

making available the manuscript with open access, is apply the Ingelfinger rule or simply refuse to publish the article. Jan Velterop Finally: Green mandates don't exclude Gold: they simply allow but do not require Gold, nor paying for Gold. Likewise RCUK policy as I understand

[GOAL] Re: Open Access in the UK: Reinventing the Big Deal

publishers and even towards those, such as funding bodies, who dare to take a position that doesn't include explicit hostility to gold OA. And what a waste it was. Jan Velterop On 7 Oct 2012, at 13:29, Stevan Harnad wrote: On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Sally Morris sa...@morris

[GOAL] Re: Open Access in the UK: Reinventing the Big Deal

Ad hominem? Ad strategem! Jan On 7 Oct 2012, at 17:39, Stevan Harnad wrote: On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Jan Velterop velte...@gmail.com wrote: As is probably widely known by readers of this list, I do not too often disagree fundamentally with Stevan Harnad. There are exceptions. I

[GOAL] Re: SCOAP3 Gold OA Membership: Unnecessary, Unscalable Unsustainable

Hear, hear! Jan On 26 Sep 2012, at 16:04, Guédon Jean-Claude wrote: This is avery good example of one constant flaw in Stevan Harnad's reasoning. It has to do with point 5. It may be true that the high-energy physics community would have achieved more for OA if it had put all of its

[GOAL] Re: Definition of OA and its Priorities and Obstacles

is a legitimate stance to take (whether or not I or anybody else agrees with the idea); arbitrarily and unilaterally changing the goalposts – or the definition of what OA should be – along the way is not. Jan Velterop On 29 Aug 2012, at 22:09, Hélène.Bosc wrote: Peter, you wrote : I am less than happy

[GOAL] Re: Definition of OA and its Priorities and Obstacles

definition. The agenda seems to have changed from striving for Open Access in any way possible, to undermining, come what may, the Open Access that can be brought by the 'gold' route. A very sad state of affairs. Jan Velterop On 28 Aug 2012, at 15:00, Stevan Harnad wrote: On 2012-08-28, at 4

[GOAL] Re: [sparc-oaforum] RE: CC-BY: derivatives and liability

' OA (i.e. CC-BY, © author, and deposited in an appropriate open repository) than many an article in some OA journals in the DOAJ (which may well be only CC-BY-NC, © publisher, and not deposited). Jan Velterop On 20 Aug 2012, at 22:42, Heather Morrison wrote: Matt, This DOES help, but note

[GOAL] Re: CC-BY and - or versus - open access

Heather, Ever heard of FUD? This is it. Jan Velterop Sent from my iPad On 17 Aug 2012, at 18:54, Heather Morrison hgmor...@sfu.ca wrote: Many in the open access movement consider CC-BY to be the very embodiment of the spirit of the Budapest Open Access Initiative - giving away all rights

[GOAL] Re: Publications managed by scholarly communities/institutions

It's a start. 27,995 or so to go. Jan On 9 Aug 2012, at 11:43, Laurent Romary wrote: Thanks. Are these all managed on their own? Laurent Le 9 août 2012 à 11:42, Bo-Christer Björk a écrit : Good idea, Here are four such journals, all of which have been there since the 1990s:

[GOAL] Re: Publications managed by scholarly communities/institutions

No, 27,995 still to be converted :-) Jan On 9 Aug 2012, at 12:05, Laurent Romary wrote: So you know 27,995 which are working without any private publisher in the loop and no author/reader fee. Laurent Le 9 août 2012 à 11:55, Jan Velterop a écrit : It's a start. 27,995 or so to go

[GOAL] Re: Planning for the Open Access Era

with their services, helping academics with these things, possibly in the form of 'gold' OA journals. Jan Velterop On 7 Aug 2012, at 16:11, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Sally Morris sa...@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk wrote: We should not delude ourselves

[GOAL] Re: Planning for the Open Access Era

Chris, The nice thing about true open access articles (under a CC-BY licence) is that they can be printed and distributed, even for a profit (CC-BY publishers are not consumed by 'profit-spite'). This is not true for the so-called OA articles which are under a Non-Commercial licence, of

[GOAL] Re: First use of the phrase open access?

/20010709143907/http://www.biomedcentral.com/. Best, Jan Velterop On 7 Aug 2012, at 00:29, Omega Alpha | Open Access wrote: Greetings. Does anyone know who/when first used the phrase open access to refer to toll free publication and/or access to scholarly literature, though not necessarily yet

[GOAL] Re: (no subject)

On 3 Aug 2012, at 03:08, Andrew A. Adams wrote: Jan Velterop wrote (on the liblicense list): Indeed, we signed up to the BOAI, as did Stevan Harnad, and the Initiative talked about two routes to OA, which have become known as 'gold' and 'green'. The BOAI doesn't talk about keeping

[GOAL] Re: Reaching for the Reachable

reach. Stevan Harnad On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 3:48 AM, Peter Murray-Rust pm...@cam.ac.uk wrote: On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Peter Murray-Rust pm...@cam.ac.uk wrote: On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Jan Velterop velte...@gmail.com wrote: Stevan may well be right

[GOAL] EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes talking to Harold Varmus about OA — video

Of definite interest to this list: www.youtube.com/watch?v=a90BpPb9kk8 Jan ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: Reaching for the Reachable

completely out of scope. So if this is the best example of a successful OA repository, Peter Murray-Rust can be forgiven for getting the impression that compliance is essentially zero, in terms of Open Access. Jan Velterop On 13 Jul 2012, at 00:11, Stevan Harnad wrote: On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:13

[GOAL] Re: Chemistry and the Green Door

If ever one needed an argument in favour of 'gold' OA, here it is. Jan On 13 Jul 2012, at 09:48, brent...@ulg.ac.be wrote: Le 13 juil. 2012 à 09:32, Peter Murray-Rust pm...@cam.ac.uk a écrit : What is the percentage of full-text ACS papers pubished by Liege which are visible at time

[GOAL] Re: Chemistry and the Green Door

So really, the only true deposited open access articles are published as 'gold'. At least that is the impression I get from this exchange. Jan On 13 Jul 2012, at 10:19, Kiley, Robert wrote: Peter These 1059 articles were deposited via the ACS “open choice” option. There will be other

[GOAL] Re: Chemistry and the Green Door

in the right direction. The goal of this meeting is to build decisive momentum. Anyone on board? Jean-Claude Le vendredi 13 juillet 2012 à 10:00 +0200, Jan Velterop a écrit : If ever one needed an argument in favour of 'gold' OA, here it is. Jan On 13 Jul 2012, at 09:48, brent

[GOAL] Re: Becoming Unglued ... a rejoinder ...

undergrads may need is not a paper book, but some computer training. The only thing missing is the smell of a book. Which is indeed a drawback of electronic literature. Best, Jan Velterop On 1 Jul 2012, at 23:49, Dana Roth wrote: In regards e-books in the sciences and engineering

[GOAL] Re: Agreement on Green OA not needed from publishers but from institutions and funders

is a different one). Jan Velterop On 20 Jun 2012, at 17:05, Jean-Claude Guédon wrote: It is not a question of hating publishers; it is a question of placing them in their rightful place. David Prosser, very aptly, defined publishers as a service industry. This is excellent. Let publishers

[GOAL] Re: Finch Report - commentary

comments, of course. Utopia Documents is free and available, for Mac and Windows (an older Linux version is available and a new one is expected this summer) from http://utopiadocs.com Jan Velterop On 20 Jun 2012, at 12:43, Marcin Wojnarski wrote: Below is my comment posted originally on Cameron

[GOAL] Re: Why should publishers agree to Green OA?

) for a service if you don't want to pay. And if you want a service and are prepared to pay, don't pay by transferring copyright, but just with plain old money. Jan Velterop Sent from Jan Velterop's iPhone. Please excuse for brevity and typos. On 20 Jun 2012, at 14:29, Andrew A. Adams

[GOAL] Re: Agreement on Green OA not needed from publishers but from institutions and funders

On 20 Jun 2012, at 16:21, Stevan Harnad wrote: On 2012-06-20, at 10:30 AM, Jan Velterop wrote: The mistake authors make is to 'pay' publishers for their services by transferring copyright. Publishers are paid, in full, by institutional subscriptions. What does 'in full' mean here

[GOAL] Re: [BOAI10] Re: Elsevier's query re: positive things from publishers that should be encouraged, celebrated, recognized

On 15 May 2012, at 19:57, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: Universities will never collaborate (third law) So there you have it, the Third Law of Acadynamics. Anybody surprised that private enterprise has stepped into the breach? Another reason why I think that gold CC-BY will win out.

[GOAL] Re: OA and scholarly publishers

Alicia, Some publishers are often criticised, you're right, and I agree that they shouldn't be for just being an established scholarly publisher. And I don't think they are as often as you perhaps assume. It is the policies and business models that are criticised rather than the publishers per

[GOAL] Re: Meaning of Open Access

I might be convinced by his core argument, and quite possibly other people on this list as well, if Stevan cum suis could come up with credible evidence that in order to get universities and funders to mandate deposit in what they call OA-repositories requires watering down OA and not sticking to

[GOAL] Re: Meaning of Open Access

The real issue is to do with usage rights. Can any article that is presented as being OA just be read with human eyes, or also be re-used and used for text-mining? The answer in my view should be 'yes', re-use and text-mining, too, whether the article is in a repository, a personal web site, or

[GOAL] Re: [BOAI] Meaning of Open Access

of Colorado Denver 1100 Lawrence St. Denver, Colo. 80204 USA (303) 556-5936 jeffrey.be...@ucdenver.edu image001.jpg From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Jan Velterop Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 6:24 AM To: Global Open Access List (Successor

[GOAL] Re: [BOAI] Meaning of Open Access

/openaccess, is often exceedingly slow and therefore difficult to consult if you don't have a lot of time). Jan On 9 May 2012, at 16:48, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Jan Velterop velte...@gmail.com wrote: Jeffrey, All research articles in BMC journals are OA, BOAI

[GOAL] Re: Open data

On 9 May 2012, at 00:53, Andrew A. Adams wrote: Jan Velterop wrote: The trouble with focussing on 'green', rather than on full BOAI-compliant OA for research literature, is that it has become an a priori concession and an end in itself. That only confuses matters (as do ill-defined labels

[GOAL] Re: Open data and article text-mining rights

. Jan On 8 May 2012, at 22:25, Stevan Harnad wrote: On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Jan Velterop velte...@gmail.com wrote: 'Insist' here is shorthand for taking an approach similar to the one you are taking re 'green'. My insist means mandate green gratis OA -- as over 200 institutions

[GOAL] Re: Meaning of Open Access

be. Jan On 9 May 2012, at 11:37, Stevan Harnad wrote: ** Cross-Posted ** On 2012-05-09, at 4:12 AM, Jan Velterop wrote: I would favour doing away with both the terms 'libre OA' and 'gratis OA'. Open Access suffices. It's the 'open' that says it all. Especially

[GOAL] Re: Meaning of Open Access

are in a position to read all the literature in their fields with their own eyes. Jan On 9 May 2012, at 16:43, Stevan Harnad wrote: On Wed, 9 May 2012, Jan Velterop wrote: The real issue is to do with usage rights. Usage rights are moot if you don't have access. There may be technical

[GOAL] Re: [BOAI10] Re: OA Ideology vs. OA Pragmatics

, May 1, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Jan Velterop velterop at gmail.com wrote: Eric, Why the second sentence? As long as they require OA, do we care how they spend ? or waste ? their money? (Except as tax payers, perhaps, but the access issue isn't the financial issue. Conflation of the two has stymied

[GOAL] Re: Wikipedia founder to help in [UK] government's research scheme

Strict logic is not what we win the battle for open access with. Some celebrity involvement is to be welcomed. On a visceral level the success of Wikipedia (not a logical outcome at the outset on the basis of the premises) may well influence the perception of open access. Jan Velterop On 2

[GOAL] Re: [BOAI10] Re: OA Ideology vs. OA Pragmatics

, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Jan Velterop velte...@gmail.com wrote: Eric, Why the second sentence? As long as they require OA, do we care how they spend – or waste – their money? (Except as tax payers, perhaps, but the access issue isn't the financial issue. Conflation of the two has stymied

[GOAL] Re: Wikipedia founder to help in [UK] government's research scheme

Strict logic is not what we win the battle for open access with. Some celebrity involvement is to be welcomed. On a visceral level the success of Wikipedia (not a logical outcome at the outset on the basis of the premises) may well influence the perception of open access. Jan Velterop On 2

[GOAL] Re: Wikipedia founder to help in [UK] government's research scheme

On 2 May 2012, at 13:32, Stevan Harnad wrote: Andrew is so right (and the current UK government is showing as much good sense in turning to JW as they showed for many years in turning to RM). Wikipedia is based on the antithesis of peer review. Asking JW to help make sure peer-reviewed

[GOAL] Re: Wikipedia founder to help in [UK] government's research scheme

On 2 May 2012, at 15:31, Stevan Harnad wrote: On 2012-05-02, at 9:28 AM, Jan Velterop wrote: On 2 May 2012, at 13:32, Stevan Harnad wrote: Andrew is so right (and the current UK government is showing as much good sense in turning to JW as they showed for many years in turning to RM

[GOAL] Re: OA Ideology vs. OA Pragmatics

prescriptions for the means helps keep the focus on the goal and also leaves the door open for imaginative ways of convincing researchers, funders and institutions, and even of achieving more OA in possibly more effective ways. Jan Velterop On 1 May 2012, at 11:54, Stevan Harnad wrote: I

[GOAL] Re: OA Ideology vs. OA Pragmatics

at gmail.com On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Peter Murray-Rust pm286 at cam.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Jan Velterop velterop at gmail.com wrote: I would simplify it further: Because Open Access (OA) maximises research usage, impact and progress, funders and institutions

[GOAL] Re: OA Ideology vs. OA Pragmatics

: eric.f.vandeve...@gmail.com On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Peter Murray-Rust pm...@cam.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Jan Velterop velte...@gmail.com wrote: I would simplify it further: Because Open Access (OA) maximises research usage

[GOAL] Re: Open Access Priorities: Peer Access and Public Access

All very well, Andrew, but did it ever occur to you that when there is no wide cultural or societal support for whatever law or mandate, more effort is generally being spent on evasion than on compliance and enforcement turns out to be like mopping up with the tap still running? If you insist

[GOAL] Re: Open Access Priorities: Peer Access and Public Access

be aimed at making the argument for OA strengthening the societal relevance of science, an argument that any scientist with a healthy dose of self-interest is bound to understand and take on board. Funders such as the Wellcome Trust are already doing important work in that regard. Jan Velterop On 28

[GOAL] Re: Open Access Priorities: Peer Access and Public Access

-- is also in the public interest -- if doing (and funding) research at all is... Stevan On 2012-04-28, at 10:05 AM, Jan Velterop wrote: Stevan sees the issue of providing open access primarily to scientists as strategic. I would have described it as tactical at best, but the main

[GOAL] Re: Open Access Priorities: Peer Access and Public Access

Just a note to express my support and 100% agreement with Peter and Arthur. Jan Velterop On 28 Apr 2012, at 10:00, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Arthur Sale a...@ozemail.com.au wrote: Stevan I disagree with you in one regard. I

[GOAL] Re: Open Access Priorities: Peer Access and Public Access

be aimed at making the argument for OA strengthening the societal relevance of science, an argument that any scientist with a healthy dose of self-interest is bound to understand and take on board. Funders such as the Wellcome Trust are already doing important work in that regard. Jan Velterop On 28

[GOAL] Re: Open Access Priorities: Peer Access and Public Access

-- is also in the public interest -- if doing (and funding) research at all is... Stevan On 2012-04-28, at 10:05 AM, Jan Velterop wrote: Stevan sees the issue of providing open access primarily to scientists as strategic. I would have described it as tactical at best, but the main

Re: [GOAL] Open Access Priorities: Peer Access and Public Access

Just a note to express my support and 100% agreement with Peter and Arthur. Jan Velterop On 28 Apr 2012, at 10:00, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Arthur Sale a...@ozemail.com.au wrote: Stevan I disagree with you in one regard. I

[GOAL] Re: what is a suitable CC license for an scholarly open access journal

analyses. Best, Jan Velterop On 26 Apr 2012, at 11:38, Sridhar Gutam wrote: Dear All, In the year 2009, when we launched the Open Access Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (OAJMAP) http://www.oajmap.in from Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Association of India (MAPAI) http

[GOAL] Re: what is a suitable CC license for an scholarly open access journal

analyses. Best, Jan Velterop On 26 Apr 2012, at 11:38, Sridhar Gutam wrote: Dear All, In the year 2009, when we launched the Open Access Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (OAJMAP) http://www.oajmap.in from Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Association of India (MAPAI

[GOAL] Re: Why Public Access vs. Research Access Matters

. It should ? and in my judgment it will ? be socially and professionally unacceptable for any researcher who wishes to be taken seriously to keep his or her published results behind barriers. Jan Velterop On 29 Mar 2012, at 02:47, Stevan Harnad wrote: No flames, Peter. I said researcher

[GOAL] Re: RCUK Open Access Feedback

I agree with Tim. Doesn't the 'NC' in CC-BY-NC just mean I can't make money from it and I would resent it if you could ? Jan Velterop ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ** Drs Johannes (Jan) Velterop, CEO Academic Concept Knowledge Ltd. (AQnowledge) +44

[GOAL] Re: RCUK Open Access Feedback

I agree with Tim. Doesn't the 'NC' in CC-BY-NC just mean I can't make money from it and I would resent it if you could ? Jan Velterop                – –  • • •   • • •  – – ** Drs Johannes (Jan) Velterop, CEOAcademic Concept

  1   2   >