[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, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Jean-Claude Guédon jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca wrote: The reference to free Gold journals covered by subscriptions is not clear to me. Is this a reference to SCOAP3? It's a reference to all subscription journals that make their online version freely accessible online (immediately upon publication). (No, SCOAP3 is a premature and unnecessary post-hoc consortial membership scheme that I think will not prove sustainable. The HEP fields have already provided near 100% (Green) OA for 20 years, un-mandated. What's needed next is for institutions and funders to mandate that all other disciplines do likewise.) Stevan Harnad Le jeudi 18 avril 2013 à 07:45 +0100, Stevan Harnad a écrit : 1. The Green/Gold Open Access (OA) distinction concerns whether it is the author or the publisher that provides the OA. 2. This distinction was important to mark with clear terms because the conflation of the two roads to OA has practical implications and has been holding up OA progress for a decade and a half. 3. The distinction between paid Gold and free Gold is very far from being a straightforward one. 4. Free Gold can be free (to the author) because the expenses of the Gold journal are covered by subscriptions, subsidies or volunteerism. 5. The funds for Paid Gold can come from the author's pocket, the author's research grant, the author's institution or the author's funder. 6. It would be both absurd and gratuitously confusing to mark each of these economic-model differences with a color-code. 7. Superfluous extra colors would also obscure the role that the colour-code was invented to perform: distinguishing author-side OA provision from publisher-side OA provision. 8. So, please, let's not have diamond, platinum and titanium OA, despite the metallurgical temptations. 9. They amplify noise instead of pinpointing the signal, just as SHERPA/Romeo's parti-colored Blue/Yellow/Green spectrum (mercifully ignored by almost everyone) does. 10. OA is about providing Open Access to peer-reviewed journal articles, not about cost-recovery models for OA publishing (Gold OA). 11. The Gold that publishers are fighting for and that researcher funders are subsidizing (whether pure or hybrid) is paid Gold, not free Gold. 12. No one knows whether or how free Gold will be sustainable, any more than they know whether or how long subscription publishing can co-exist viably with mandatory Green OA. 13. So please leave the economic ideology and speculation out of the pragmatics of OA policy making by the research community (institutions and funders). 14. Cost-recovery models are the province of publishers (Gold OA). 15. What the research community needs to do is mandate OA provision. 16. The only OA provision that is entirely in the research community's hands is Green OA. And, before you ask, please let's not play into the publishers' hands by colour-coding OA also in terms of the length of the publisher embargo: 3-month OA, 6-month OA, 12-month-OA, 24-month-OA, millennial OA: OA means immediate online access. Anything else is delayed access. (The only quasi-exception is the Almost-OA provided by the author via the institutional repository's email-eprint-request Button when complying with publisher embargoes -- but that too is clearly not OA, which is immediate, free online access.) And on no account should the genuine, substantive distinction between Gratis OA (free online access) and Libre OA (free online access plus various re-use rights) be color-coded (with a different shade for every variety of CC license)! Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y, Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H., Hilf, E. (2004) The Access/Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access. Serials Review 30. Shorter version: The green and the gold roads to Open Access. Nature Web Focus. ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Re: Paid Gold vs. Free Gold
Yes, here are some: http://www.openoasis.org/index.php?option=com_contentview=articleid=553It emid=378 Wolters Kluwer bought Medknow a couple of years ago but has (so far) retained its subscription-plus-immediate-free-access model: http://www.medknow.com/journals.asp Alma Swan On 19/04/2013 06:52, Jan Velterop velte...@gmail.com wrote: 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, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Jean-Claude Guédon jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca wrote: The reference to free Gold journals covered by subscriptions is not clear to me. Is this a reference to SCOAP3? It's a reference to all subscription journals that make their online version freely accessible online (immediately upon publication). (No, SCOAP3 is a premature and unnecessary post-hoc consortial membership scheme that I think will not prove sustainable. The HEP fields have already provided near 100% (Green) OA for 20 years, un-mandated. What's needed next is for institutions and funders to mandate that all other disciplines do likewise.) Stevan Harnad Le jeudi 18 avril 2013 à 07:45 +0100, Stevan Harnad a écrit : 1. The Green/Gold Open Access (OA) distinction concerns whether it is the author or the publisher that provides the OA. 2. This distinction was important to mark with clear terms because the conflation of the two roads to OA has practical implications and has been holding up OA progress for a decade and a half. 3. The distinction between paid Gold and free Gold is very far from being a straightforward one. 4. Free Gold can be free (to the author) because the expenses of the Gold journal are covered by subscriptions, subsidies or volunteerism. 5. The funds for Paid Gold can come from the author's pocket, the author's research grant, the author's institution or the author's funder. 6. It would be both absurd and gratuitously confusing to mark each of these economic-model differences with a color-code. 7. Superfluous extra colors would also obscure the role that the colour-code was invented to perform: distinguishing author-side OA provision from publisher-side OA provision. 8. So, please, let's not have diamond, platinum and titanium OA http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/993-.html , despite the metallurgical temptations. 9. They amplify noise instead of pinpointing the signal, just as SHERPA/Romeo http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/453-SHERPARoMEO-Publishe rs-with-Paid-Options-for-Open-Access.html 's parti-colored Blue/Yellow/Green spectrum http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeoinfo.html#colours (mercifully ignored by almost everyone) does. 10. OA is about providing Open Access to peer-reviewed journal articles, not about cost-recovery models for OA publishing (Gold OA). 11. The Gold that publishers are fighting for and that researcher funders are subsidizing (whether pure or hybrid) is paid Gold, not free Gold. 12. No one knows whether or how free Gold will be sustainable, any more than they know whether or how long subscription publishing can co-exist viably with mandatory Green OA. 13. So please leave the economic ideology and speculation out of the pragmatics of OA policy making by the research community (institutions and funders). 14. Cost-recovery models are the province of publishers (Gold OA). 15. What the research community needs to do is mandate OA provision. 16. The only OA provision that is entirely in the research community's hands is Green OA. And, before you ask, please let's not play into the publishers' hands by colour-coding OA also in terms of the length of the publisher embargo: 3-month OA, 6-month OA, 12-month-OA, 24-month-OA, millennial OA: OA means immediate online access. Anything else is delayed access. (The only quasi-exception is the Almost-OA http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/839-Publisher-OA-Embargo es,-IDOA-Mandates-and-the-Almost-OA-Button.html provided by the author via the institutional repository's email-eprint-request Button when complying with publisher embargoes -- but that too is clearly not OA, which is immediate, free online access.) And on no account should the genuine, substantive distinction between Gratis OA http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/442-guid.html (free online access) and Libre OA http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/442-guid.html (free online access plus various re-use rights) be color-coded (with a different shade for every variety of CC license)! Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y, Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H., Hilf, E. (2004) The Access/Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access
[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). Policy and Internet, which used to be published by BEPress (and annoyingly, links to their site are now dead, without them telling authors) but since moved to Wiley Online Library. The subscription is online only and institutional only. BEPress used to have a nag-wall in the way of access (they requested but didn't require that you recommend institutional subscription to your librarian to help fund the journal). The annual institutional subscription rate is $327 pa. I'm not sure what, other than helping to ensure the viability of the journal, this subscription gets the institution since both the HTML and PDF versions of all the papers seem to be open (I don't think we have an institutional subscription that's invisible to me, though I haven't checked from home). -- Professor Andrew A Adams a...@meiji.ac.jp Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan http://www.a-cubed.info/ ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Re: Paid Gold vs. Free Gold
From the Wiley Online Library site: Policy Internet — http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/poi3.20/full Options for accessing this content: If you have access to this content through a society membership, please first log in to your society website. If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian. Login via other institutional login options http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/login-options. You can purchase online access to this Article for a 24-hour period (price varies by title) If you already have a Wiley Online Library or Wiley 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 2013, at 08:39, Andrew A. Adams a...@meiji.ac.jp wrote: Are there examples of such subscription journals that make their online version freely accessible online (immediately upon publication). Policy and Internet, which used to be published by BEPress (and annoyingly, links to their site are now dead, without them telling authors) but since moved to Wiley Online Library. The subscription is online only and institutional only. BEPress used to have a nag-wall in the way of access (they requested but didn't require that you recommend institutional subscription to your librarian to help fund the journal). The annual institutional subscription rate is $327 pa. I'm not sure what, other than helping to ensure the viability of the journal, this subscription gets the institution since both the HTML and PDF versions of all the papers seem to be open (I don't think we have an institutional subscription that's invisible to me, though I haven't checked from home). -- Professor Andrew A Adams a...@meiji.ac.jp Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan http://www.a-cubed.info/ ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Re: Paid Gold vs. Free Gold
This corresponds for instance to the Freemium scheme of OpenEdition. Under this scheme, papers are freely available in HTML and additional services are offered to libraries that have taken a subscription (ePub, pdf, cataloguing facilities, etc.) Laurent Le 19 avr. 2013 à 07:52, Jan Velterop a écrit : 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, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Jean-Claude Guédon jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca wrote: The reference to free Gold journals covered by subscriptions is not clear to me. Is this a reference to SCOAP3? It's a reference to all subscription journals that make their online version freely accessible online (immediately upon publication). (No, SCOAP3 is a premature and unnecessary post-hoc consortial membership scheme that I think will not prove sustainable. The HEP fields have already provided near 100% (Green) OA for 20 years, un-mandated. What's needed next is for institutions and funders to mandate that all other disciplines do likewise.) Stevan Harnad Le jeudi 18 avril 2013 à 07:45 +0100, Stevan Harnad a écrit : 1. The Green/Gold Open Access (OA) distinction concerns whether it is the author or the publisher that provides the OA. 2. This distinction was important to mark with clear terms because the conflation of the two roads to OA has practical implications and has been holding up OA progress for a decade and a half. 3. The distinction between paid Gold and free Gold is very far from being a straightforward one. 4. Free Gold can be free (to the author) because the expenses of the Gold journal are covered by subscriptions, subsidies or volunteerism. 5. The funds for Paid Gold can come from the author's pocket, the author's research grant, the author's institution or the author's funder. 6. It would be both absurd and gratuitously confusing to mark each of these economic-model differences with a color-code. 7. Superfluous extra colors would also obscure the role that the colour-code was invented to perform: distinguishing author-side OA provision from publisher-side OA provision. 8. So, please, let's not have diamond, platinum and titanium OA, despite the metallurgical temptations. 9. They amplify noise instead of pinpointing the signal, just as SHERPA/Romeo's parti-colored Blue/Yellow/Green spectrum (mercifully ignored by almost everyone) does. 10. OA is about providing Open Access to peer-reviewed journal articles, not about cost-recovery models for OA publishing (Gold OA). 11. The Gold that publishers are fighting for and that researcher funders are subsidizing (whether pure or hybrid) is paid Gold, not free Gold. 12. No one knows whether or how free Gold will be sustainable, any more than they know whether or how long subscription publishing can co-exist viably with mandatory Green OA. 13. So please leave the economic ideology and speculation out of the pragmatics of OA policy making by the research community (institutions and funders). 14. Cost-recovery models are the province of publishers (Gold OA). 15. What the research community needs to do is mandate OA provision. 16. The only OA provision that is entirely in the research community's hands is Green OA. And, before you ask, please let's not play into the publishers' hands by colour-coding OA also in terms of the length of the publisher embargo: 3-month OA, 6-month OA, 12-month-OA, 24-month-OA, millennial OA: OA means immediate online access. Anything else is delayed access. (The only quasi-exception is the Almost-OA provided by the author via the institutional repository's email-eprint-request Button when complying with publisher embargoes -- but that too is clearly not OA, which is immediate, free online access.) And on no account should the genuine, substantive distinction between Gratis OA (free online access) and Libre OA (free online access plus various re-use rights) be color-coded (with a different shade for every variety of CC license)! Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y, Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H., Hilf, E. (2004) The Access/Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access. Serials Review 30. Shorter version: The green and the gold roads to Open Access. Nature Web Focus. ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal Laurent Romary INRIA HUB-IDSL laurent.rom...@inria.fr ___ GOAL mailing list
[GOAL] Re: Paid Gold vs. Free Gold
Jan is right. It appears my institution has a subscription that I didn't know about - when trying to access the papers from home, I now get directed to a paywall. -- Professor Andrew A Adams a...@meiji.ac.jp Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan http://www.a-cubed.info/ ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Re: Paid Gold vs. Free Gold
As Jan Velterop says, it makes little economic sense to develop such a business plan; yet it exists. We should probably ask why. One obvious but unlikely answer would be stupidity. A more likely answer is that it is to the advantages of the publishers, collectively, constantly to bring new , so-called innovative solutions to e-publishing. This is part of their competitive games, of course, but, more fundamentally, it muddies the waters of open access and it slows down acceptance. In this regard, Stevan is quite right: we do need a simple, clear message to the world. But this message must be simple, not simplistic. Jean-Claude Guédon PS David Prosser is right, Green and Gold are enough. Free Gold is perfectly clear. Le vendredi 19 avril 2013 à 17:20 +0900, Andrew A. Adams a écrit : Jan is right. It appears my institution has a subscription that I didn't know about - when trying to access the papers from home, I now get directed to a paywall. -- Jean-Claude Guédon Professeur titulaire Littérature comparée Université de Montréal ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Re: Paid Gold vs. Free Gold
Thank you to Stevan for outlining his views as clearly as he does. I also acknowledge his desire to frame a message in terms as clear and simple as possible in order to seek optimal effectiveness in penetrating people's minds. However, this quest for conceptual simplicity through linguistic and analytical rigour must also remain close to reality. To this end, allow me to make the following points: 1. The proposed distinction between green and gold ignores the fact that the Green Road needs a publisher's agreement to work. The button for access to dark archives is a work around,. It is important and useful, but it complicates the OA landscape. 2. Conflating green and gold makes little sense; however, envisioning reasons why they should ultimately converge is useful to map out strategies that are not simply static (mandate, mandate, mandate...), but, on the contrary, can innovate in useful ways. 3. OK 4. The reference to free Gold journals covered by subscriptions is not clear to me. Is this a reference to SCOAP3? 5-11 OK 12. Free Gold will be financially viable - I do not like the commercial connotation of sustainable - when the public funders who subsidize scientific research integrate the cost of scientific communications fully into their financing scheme. Already, many examples exist of partial or total acceptance of this principle. 13. While fully accepting the needs for strong pragmatic approaches to OA, I should underscore that, right now, and after years of campaigning, repositories still do not cut it as obvious research tools for researchers. Mandates begin to answer this, but, as the wonderful case of Liège shows, it takes more than a strong mandate to make Green successful; it also takes strong implementation. The politics of these goals must also enter into the equation of the pragmatics of OA. 14 OK 15. See 13 above. 16. Not really, as implementation requires administrators that get it (e.g. Bernard Rentier at Liège) and who are willing to make rules that will lead researchers to comply. To this extent, the Green Road also needs more than researchers, for example a realistic implementation of the mandate. Jean-Claude Guédon Le jeudi 18 avril 2013 à 07:45 +0100, Stevan Harnad a écrit : 1. The Green/Gold Open Access (OA) distinction concerns whether it is the author or the publisher that provides the OA. 2. This distinction was important to mark with clear terms because the conflation of the two roads to OA has practical implications and has been holding up OA progress for a decade and a half. 3. The distinction between paid Gold and free Gold is very far from being a straightforward one. 4. Free Gold can be free (to the author) because the expenses of the Gold journal are covered by subscriptions, subsidies or volunteerism. 5. The funds for Paid Gold can come from the author's pocket, the author's research grant, the author's institution or the author's funder. 6. It would be both absurd and gratuitously confusing to mark each of these economic-model differences with a color-code. 7. Superfluous extra colors would also obscure the role that the colour-code was invented to perform: distinguishing author-side OA provision from publisher-side OA provision. 8. So, please, let's not have diamond, platinum and titanium OA, despite the metallurgical temptations. 9. They amplify noise instead of pinpointing the signal, just as SHERPA/Romeo's parti-colored Blue/Yellow/Green spectrum (mercifully ignored by almost everyone) does. 10. OA is about providing Open Access to peer-reviewed journal articles, not about cost-recovery models for OA publishing (Gold OA). 11. The Gold that publishers are fighting for and that researcher funders are subsidizing (whether pure or hybrid) is paid Gold, not free Gold. 12. No one knows whether or how free Gold will be sustainable, any more than they know whether or how long subscription publishing can co-exist viably with mandatory Green OA. 13. So please leave the economic ideology and speculation out of the pragmatics of OA policy making by the research community (institutions and funders). 14. Cost-recovery models are the province of publishers (Gold OA). 15. What the research community needs to do is mandate OA provision. 16. The only OA provision that is entirely in the research community's hands is Green OA. And, before you ask, please let's not play into the publishers' hands by colour-coding OA also in terms of the length of the publisher embargo: 3-month OA, 6-month OA, 12-month-OA, 24-month-OA, millennial OA: OA means immediate online access. Anything else is delayed access. (The only quasi-exception is the Almost-OA provided by the author via the institutional repository's email-eprint-request Button when complying with publisher embargoes -- but that too is clearly not OA, which is immediate, free online access.) And on no account
[GOAL] Re: Paid Gold vs. Free Gold
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Jean-Claude Guédon jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca wrote: The reference to free Gold journals covered by subscriptions is not clear to me. Is this a reference to SCOAP3? It's a reference to all subscription journals that make their online version freely accessible online (immediately upon publication). (No, SCOAP3 is a premature and unnecessary post-hoc consortial membership scheme that I think will not prove sustainable. The HEP fields have already provided near 100% (Green) OA for 20 years, un-mandated. What's needed next is for institutions and funders to mandate that all other disciplines do likewise.) Stevan Harnad Le jeudi 18 avril 2013 à 07:45 +0100, Stevan Harnad a écrit : 1. The Green/Gold Open Access (OA) distinction concerns whether it is the author or the publisher that provides the OA. 2. This distinction was important to mark with clear terms because the conflation of the two roads to OA has practical implications and has been holding up OA progress for a decade and a half. 3. The distinction between paid Gold and free Gold is very far from being a straightforward one. 4. Free Gold can be free (to the author) because the expenses of the Gold journal are covered by subscriptions, subsidies or volunteerism. 5. The funds for Paid Gold can come from the author's pocket, the author's research grant, the author's institution or the author's funder. 6. It would be both absurd and gratuitously confusing to mark each of these economic-model differences with a color-code. 7. Superfluous extra colors would also obscure the role that the colour-code was invented to perform: distinguishing author-side OA provision from publisher-side OA provision. 8. So, please, let's not have diamond, platinum and titanium OAhttp://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/993-.html, despite the metallurgical temptations. 9. They amplify noise instead of pinpointing the signal, just as SHERPA/Romeohttp://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/453-SHERPARoMEO-Publishers-with-Paid-Options-for-Open-Access.html's parti-colored Blue/Yellow/Green spectrumhttp://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeoinfo.html#colours(mercifully ignored by almost everyone) does. 10. OA is about providing Open Access to peer-reviewed journal articles, not about cost-recovery models for OA publishing (Gold OA). 11. The Gold that publishers are fighting for and that researcher funders are subsidizing (whether pure or hybrid) is paid Gold, not free Gold. 12. No one knows whether or how free Gold will be sustainable, any more than they know whether or how long subscription publishing can co-exist viably with mandatory Green OA. 13. So please leave the economic ideology and speculation out of the pragmatics of OA policy making by the research community (institutions and funders). 14. Cost-recovery models are the province of publishers (Gold OA). 15. What the research community needs to do is mandate OA provision. 16. The only OA provision that is entirely in the research community's hands is Green OA. And, before you ask, please let's not play into the publishers' hands by colour-coding OA also in terms of the length of the publisher embargo: 3-month OA, 6-month OA, 12-month-OA, 24-month-OA, millennial OA: OA means *immediate online access*. Anything else is delayed access. (The only quasi-exception is the Almost-OAhttp://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/839-Publisher-OA-Embargoes,-IDOA-Mandates-and-the-Almost-OA-Button.html provided by the author via the institutional repository's email-eprint-request Button when complying with publisher embargoes -- but that too is clearly *not OA,* which is immediate, free online access.) And on no account should the genuine, substantive distinction between Gratis OA http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/442-guid.html(free online access) and Libre OA http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/442-guid.html(free online access plus various re-use rights) be color-coded (with a different shade for every variety of CC license)! Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y, Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H., Hilf, E. (2004) The Access/Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Accesshttp://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/10209/. Serials Review 30. Shorter version: The green and the gold roads to Open Access http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/accessdebate/21.html. *Nature Web Focus*. ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
