[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Paying for open access

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