Re: a preservation experience

[Steve Hitchcock <sh94r@ecs.soton.ac.uk>]

Keith, You appear to be saying exactly the same as in your original
posting. You imply that subscription journals can support archiving but
open access journals can't, without providing justification for either
position.

Perhaps if you can clarify this statement it might help:

> I end up coming back to some mechanism that would have them receiving 
> funds in exchange for providing access to their archived materials.
Steve

At 20:48 09/11/03 -0500, Keith Seitter wrote:

> Please do not misinterpret what I was trying to say.  I am not against the
> concept of open access publishing in favor of subscription based
> approaches.
>
> What I am saying is that whenever I try to think through a business model
> that provides for Eileen's five independent organizations or institutions
> having adequate long-term funding for archiving, I end up coming back to
> some mechanism that would have them receiving funds in exchange for
> providing access to their archived materials.  It is hard to see how to
> make this work, however, in an environment in which open access publishing
> prevails.
>
> I realize it may be hard to read this and not interpret it as an argument
> against open access, but that is not my intent.  What I am saying is that
> open access makes Eileen's already difficult requirements for an archive
> solution even harder to achieve.  It is going to take some very creative
> thinking to move us toward the twin goals of open access and a stable
> long-term archive.  (Rather than "twin" goals perhaps I should say
> "married" goals, because they were not born together but we must, I think,
> bring them to a compatible union.)
>
> Keith Seitter
> Deputy Executive Director
> American Meteorological Society