[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OA and copyright (RE: Springer blasts Open Choice criticism)
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: OA and copyright (RE: Springer blasts Open Choice criticism)
- From: Joseph Esposito <espositoj@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 21:57:23 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
While I don't think the Springer Open Choice program is likely to be successful in the long run (the administrative requirements for tracking prices, Open Choice income, an institution's credits, etc., are likely to be a tangle), it should be noted what Springer has NOT done: namely, used the Open Choice flavor of Open Access as a way to increase income--as one would have expected and which, frankly, Springer's shareholders have a right to demand. As reported in the OA debate in the Nature forum over the past several months, at least one society journal (yes, a not-for-profit) allows an author or author's proxy to purchase OA rights after publication and ON TOP OF the subscription revenue. In effect some articles get paid for twice: once as a subscription and a second time to set it "free" in the OA world. That Springer should have foregone this option is a matter of wonder. Joe Esposito On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 22:02:38 EDT, Rick Anderson <rickand@unr.edu> wrote: > > Open Choice has come in for criticism from OA vendors and bloggers for > > being overpriced and not offering 'pure' open access because Springer > > will retain copyright. > > To the degree that people's objections are based on Springer's retention > of copyright, it reflects an unfortunately narrow idea of OA. I don't see > any reason to object to an OA model that allows the whole world to read > the content while leaving the traditionally exclusive rights of copyright > holders intact. If the point of OA is to make content freely available, > rather than to undermine the very concept of intellectual property, then > there's no reason at all why copyright can't be retained by either authors > or the publishers to whom authors assign it. It's really too bad that the > three prevailing OA protocols (Berlin, Bethesda, Barcelona) all insist on > requiring copyright holders to abdicate those exclusive rights. > > ---- > Rick Anderson > rickand@unr.edu
- Prev by Date: Re: Springer blasts Open Choice criticism
- Next by Date: Re: Springer blasts Open Choice criticism
- Previous by thread: OA and copyright (RE: Springer blasts Open Choice criticism)
- Next by thread: New capital for Swets & Zeitlinger
- Index(es):