[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Ann Okerson's message about IRs, and the role of consortia in publishing
- To: SPARC-OAForum@arl.org, liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Ann Okerson's message about IRs, and the role of consortia in publishing
- From: Brian Simboli <brs4@lehigh.edu>
- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 19:57:12 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
It was fascinating to read the account of the discussion to which Ann Okerson's message (copied below) alludes and especially the sentiments of the second faction to which she refers. Not to ascribe that second faction views they don't necessarily hold, but perhaps that faction would be sympathetic with the publishing model proposed at: http://www.lehigh.edu/library/guides/overlayjournals.html Of course, the subject of Ann's message was a repository software, and the issue whether libraries should or should not support its vendor's effort to charge for enhanced access to material otherwise freely available, but there is no reason why (/mutatis mutandis/) an electronic journal publisher--especially a university consortium -- couldn't run with the idea of providing enhanced access to content otherwise free. At the risk of repetition: the whole emphasis on open access, not to mention author charges as a way to fund open access, has diverted attention from another way of doing things. This webpage above proposes an overlay model in which publishers deposit journals articles for free access in a repository, but where enhanced access, for a fee, is also an option. The subscription overlay model builds in a revenue generation model that can support publishing operations, where revenue generation derives from such enhanced services (this is from the webpage) as: * additional informational content (including e.g. news, or links to online reference resources, or services such as job boards) * citing/cited reference capabilities of the kind discussed here <http://www.lehigh.edu/library/guides/Citing/citations.html> * email alerting services; searchable abstracting and indexing * direct linkages to citation management software * analyze capabilities * graphical displays of conceptual relationships between articles * cross-reference linking; and "mark and email" (or print) capabilities. BMC has already recognized that OA along the lines of the subscription overlay model need not threaten a commercial enterprise's existence. My own interest in the model is especially along the lines of how it can enable universities--and their consortia in particular--to get into the publishing game. It is becoming clear that unless they themselves do something about the serials crisis, the crisis will just continue indefinitely. I believe the pressure, and expectation, that the Internet creates to make information freely available may well push publishing in the direction of something like the subscription overlay. Brian Simboli Peter Suber wrote:
[Forwarding from Ann Okerson on the LibLicense list. --Peter.] At a meeting last week of consortial directors and representatives, an interesting topic was raised. One consortium had developed a specialized (in subject) institutional repository using a particular vendor's IR software. The content in this consortium's IR is available to the world for free and that will not change; the consortium and authors are committed to this. At the same time, the vendor is marketing the software in a way that content developed and made available through the IR software by all of the vendor's IR customers can be cross searched with some nice enhancements - for a fee. This set off quite a conversation. o One side reasoned that owners of the IRs should/could refuse to have their content participate, even passively, in such a commercial setting, as antithetical to their desires when they set up the IR. o Others reasoned that owners of the IRs should/could cooperate with the IR software vendor to assure that the content can be included (author permissions, etc.) so that authors can also get the benefit of better, more focused search and services. Any thoughts about this kind of situation? There is a lot of potential for a lot of re-use, re-purposing, upgrading of works that are freely available. It's a new world we're entering. Ann Okerson/Yale Library
- Prev by Date: Re: Open Access and For-Pay Access (to the same IR materials)
- Next by Date: SPARC Transition: Johnson to Joseph
- Previous by thread: Revision to Physical Review B & OA or for-pay
- Next by thread: SPARC Transition: Johnson to Joseph
- Index(es):