[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Monopolies in publishing
- To: "'Terry Hulbert '" <terry.hulbert@iop.org>, Jan Velterop <jan@biomedcentral.com>, "'liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu '" <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: Monopolies in publishing
- From: Jan Velterop <jan@biomedcentral.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 17:32:54 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Of course, editorial decisions and peer-review is what the 'labels' stand for. Who's paying for it is not the only difference between BMC's open access journals and others, though. Who has access (just subscribers, or everybody) is another one. Jan -----Original Message----- From: Terry Hulbert To: jan@biomedcentral.com; liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Sent: 7/11/03 1:17 PM Subject: RE: Monopolies in publishing Hmm, I knew I'd regret this :-) >>...they are preprints without a journal 'label sown into them', and in the journals they obviously have this 'label'. << Methinks you're being just a tad disingenuous here, Jan. The difference between these two manifestations of the article isn't just a 'label'. It's a label that's been through a process - peer-review This is the key difference, I guess - although not the only one. Maybe this is worth paying for? The only difference between BMC and the vast majority of other publishers is who's paying for this. And, as is often pointed out, how much is being paid. Terry
- Prev by Date: RE: Monopolies in publishing
- Next by Date: Turpion Journals - 2004 subscription rates
- Previous by thread: RE: Monopolies in publishing
- Next by thread: RE: Monopolies in publishing
- Index(es):