Re: SCOAP2

["Redfield, Ann M." <redfield@SLAC.Stanford.EDU>]

Travis (SLAC Library) responded to Gene on PAMnet and I am 
sharing his response here as well.

Ann M. Redfield
Library Manager
SLAC Research Library
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Menlo Park, California

-----Original Message-----
From: PAMnet [mailto:PAMNET@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Brooks, Travis C.
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 5:48 PM
To: PAMNET@listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: SCOAP

I'd like to clarify something that Gene said that I worry could 
be misinterpreted here:

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Gene Sprouse wrote:

> each must be asked to triple what it now pays for PRD,

In the SCOAP3 model, no library is being asked pay triple for 
Phys. Rev. D at all. Libraries are expected to simply redirect 
most or all of their current, overall HEP subscription costs to 
SCOAP3. SCOAP3 will then have a tender for the price of the 
peer-review service, negotiate prices and pay the journals. 
Libraries will not pay individually for PRD, or PLB, or any of 
the other HEP journals.  No library is asked to pay more than 
they currently pay, if anything they will save money with respect 
to the present situation. See http://www.scoap3.org/about.html 
for details

The budget envelope of SCOAP3 is designed to be sufficient to 
cover the costs that Gene refers to, by re-directing subscription 
funds. However we can't be sure of this total until enough 
libraries begin to sign on to support the model and we can enter 
negotiations with the journals. In a few months a quarter of the 
funds have already been pledged 
(http://www.scoap3.org/fundraising.html), with more expected to 
come soon, but this depends on us all: only if we, US librarians, 
signify our support to the model, 
http://www.scoap3.org/scoap3us.html, we will know if it will be a 
viable alternative to the present system.

> The funding and sustainability of the SCOAP3 model have yet to 
> be developed and demonstrated. If they can be, then APS would 
> be willing to make PRD freely available on our site.

Libraries on this list should take note of this statement!  It is 
in our power to demonstrate massive support to the SCOAP3 model, 
pledging a re-direction of our subscription funds, and therefore 
its sustainability. Here is a publisher stating that if libraries 
go for it, the publisher will follow.

APS is justifiably worried about the sustainability of their 
funding sources.  The best way to allay this fear is to step up 
and voice support.

Libraries cannot sit back and wait for journals to propose a 
solution to the problems we have. This has not worked so far. 
As the APS is clearly stating, the journals are waiting for the 
libraries.  If libraries in turn wait for the journals, nothing 
happens simply because neither side can make the first move: 
SCOAP3 offers us an opportunity to overcome this deadlock.

If your library is willing to re-direct your HEP subscriptions 
into SCOAP3, under the condition it will deliver what it 
promises, then voice your support through 
http://www.scoap3.org/scoap3us.html.  This will bring us one 
(big) step torward addressing Gene's concerns and making viable 
and sustainable Open Access a reality.

Best Regards,
Travis

Travis C. Brooks
SPIRES Scientific Databases Manager
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires