[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Paying for open access
- To: "'liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu'" <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: Paying for open access
- From: Jan Velterop <jan@biomedcentral.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 19:42:30 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
For the avoidance of misunderstandings, what I did not imply is that libraries may not be willing to pay for open access. What some libraries may not be keen to pay for is the 6 months' or so 'immediacy' if the material becomes freely available after that. Much better to use that money to procure immediate open access straight away. Paying for open access may superficially look like subscriptions, but there is an essential difference. Payment takes place on behalf of researchers in their roles of *authors* rather than on behalf of them as *readers*. This reversal of the publishing business model enables open access. It is paying for optimal dissemination instead of paying for restricted access. Jan Velterop > -----Original Message----- > From: Ann Okerson [mailto:ann.okerson@yale.edu] > Sent: 06 July 2003 22:45 > To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu > Subject: RE: Sabo Bill: Measure Calls for Wider Access to Federally > > > Phil Davis is right to suggest that there can be various acceptable ways > of paying for e-content, i.e., a variety of business models. We all need > to work together to identify models that will *work,* whether they be the > kind of behind-the-scenes, up-front payment that the open access movement > supports, or some kind of subscriptions, or... > > On a related note, Jan Velterop's posting below suggests that in open > access models, libraries will somehow *not* pay for e-content. Yet I > would observe that at our institution we have paid and are paying for at > least some open access e-journals, through what look to me very much like > subscription prices, though they are called memberships. We can call such > annual payments memberships, or founders fees or supporting fees, but in > the end they are a business model that feels like a subscription by a > different name. Libraries who have budgets will be essential in paying > for open access. If we think that's not the case, we could be fooling > ourselves. > > **NOTE: I'm not writing here about the pros and cons of open access, but > rather how we all will support ejournals in the present and future. These > two concepts seem often to get mixed up.** > > Sincerely, Ann Okerson/Yale Library
- Prev by Date: The Journal of Neuroscience Online Access
- Next by Date: Open Access and "Membership Costs"
- Previous by thread: The Journal of Neuroscience Online Access
- Next by thread: Re: Paying for open access
- Index(es):