RE: Thoughts on the House of Commons report

["Rick Anderson" <rickand@unr.edu>]

> 1. Making publicly-funded research publicly-available does not imply 
> any diminution in the author's IP rights.

That's true, as long as "publicly available" doesn't mean "available
according to the Berlin, Bethesda or Budapest OA programs" (since in all
three cases a participating author gives up the exclusive rights to copy,
distribute and make derivative versions of their original works -- a very
significant diminution of the author's IP rights).

But let's assume that publicly-funded research is being made publicly
available under an OA protocol other than one of the Three Bs, one that
really does preserve the author's IP rights.  My question remains: what is
(or should be) the threshold level of public funding for this requirement?

> 2. An institutional repository has many roles, not necessarily 
> long-term preservation. The parliamentary report envisages the high 
> long-term preservation costs being borne by the British Library, with 
> low normal recurrent costs for university repositories.

Good point.  I kept reminding myself during my review of the report that
this was written for a specifically British audience, one with a different
type of national academic infrastructure than that of the U.S., but at
times that awareness slipped..

> 5. If an academic only joins a learned society to get a subsidized 
> copy of the journal, what does that tell us about the importance of 
> learned societies in academia? I believe learned societies have a 
> valuable function and their value must be more based upon something more 
> than a "freebie".

Adam Chesler has already responded articulately in this regard, and you
both make good points.  To the degree that societies offer their members
significant value beyond the provision of a journal, they probably don't
need to worry about members dropping out simply because their journals
become freely available to the general public.  Adam's other concerns
remain compelling, though.  And while I'm sure there are many societies
that offer a wide range of useful programs and services, I'd be willing to
bet money that there are more than a handful that attract members
primarily by churning out journal issues.  (And don't forget the members
who are actually libraries, and whose memberships are purchased precisely
for the sole purpose of getting the journal...) 

Rick Anderson
rickand@unr.edu