[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: BMC pricing model
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: Re: BMC pricing model
- From: "Andy Gass" <agass@plos.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:41:52 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
David Goodman is absolutely right when he says that "This is unexplored territory, and we have only ongoing experience as our guide." Through its institutional membership program, BioMed Central (BMC) has pioneered the practice of engaging academic institutions to help catalyze a widespread transition to open access-and like any project with no precedent, this one seems to have generated some important feedback about how similar programs should function in the future. No one, certainly not BMC or the Public Library of Science (PLoS ), wants institutions or their libraries to feel abused when they attempt to support open access. The question, then, is what sort of system might effectively allow institutions to offer financial support for open-access publishing and to provide incentives for researchers to publish in open-access journals, without shifting the bulk of the financial burden for open-access publishing onto those institutions. One answer is for libraries who are interested in promoting open access to pay a flat fee that offsets a percentage of their authors' publishing costs, rather than those costs in their entirety. The onus then falls on publishers like BMC and PLoS to design and offer membership options to individual institutions and consortia that allow those groups to provide meaningful support for open access at a level that is feasible for them, but that also genuinely helps the publishers to experiment and to thrive. The recent criticism of BMC's membership program in this forum is not a setback for open access, as some have suggested. Listserv discussions like this are valuable tools to help establish what optimal practices should be in complex emerging areas-and the systems publishers use to generate institutional support for open access clearly constitute one such area. As Goodman writes, there is no reason this conversation cannot function as "a positive step towards finding the best model with which to go forward." ------------------------------------- Andy Gass Outreach Coordinator Public Library of Science 185 Berry St. Suite 1300 San Francisco, CA 94107 p +1 415 624 1202 f +1 415 546 4090 www.plos.org agass@plos.org=
- Prev by Date: RE: What are the Key Library Issues?
- Next by Date: Open access pricing
- Previous by thread: Re: BMC pricing model
- Next by thread: Re: BMC pricing model
- Index(es):