[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: JISC Invitation to Tender: Open Access Publishing

Initiative Round 2
Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-edited-by: liblicen@pantheon.yale.edu
Date: Sat,  2 Oct 2004 12:58:59 EDT
Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.2 -- ListProc(tm) by CREN
Precedence: bulk

I was not for a moment suggesting that societies (or other publishers) 
did not begin to consider OA until the JISC project was announced - far 
from it. Many of our members and others have, of course, been thinking 
and experimenting for a while now.

What I was trying to say was that the timing of the JISC funding meant 
that it would not, of itself, encourage any publisher to rethink its 
business model.  It would only benefit those already intending to do 
so.  It could thus have much more radical effect if the timing was 

Sally Morris, Chief Executive
Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers
E-mail:  chief-exec@alpsp.org

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>; <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 10:54 PM
Subject: RE: JISC Invitation to Tender: Open Access Publishing 
Initiative Round 2

> Sally,
>I think your letter implies that most society publishers did not begin 
>to consider Open Access until the JISC proposal was issued. Given the 
>HoC report, I find it difficult to imagine a publisher not recognizing 
>that they might have to deal with the consequences, and deal with them 
>as early as the coming subscription year.


>Dr. David Goodman