RE: Fwd: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component

["David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>]

And in addition to what Mark said--

Exactly how they publish their research is not critically important to
them-- publishing it, and in a highly regarded journal, is what matters,
not the journal's business model or access policies. They may well be
aware that there are better or worse journals and publishers in these
ancilliary respects, and they'll use use the better, but only if this is
either easier or necessary. Hence the paradox that most scientists would
gladly publish OA if required, but only if required.

Dr. David Goodman
Associate Professor
Palmer School of Library and Information Science
Long Island University
dgoodman@liu.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu on behalf of Mark Funk
Sent: Tue 5/10/2005 10:35 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: Re: Fwd: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component
 
Well, so much for the need to educate anybody about what is good for them:
about a proper diet, exercise, drinking in moderation, and the like. If
they knew what was good for them, they'd already do it, right? This
philosophy alone will save millions in health education.  (Although I do
have worries about the health of the nation...)  Seriously, when brand new
things appear, people need to be educated about them. Busy researchers are
busy doing research. They have submitted papers the same way for years or
decades. They don't think about it any more. OA and IRs are a new way, and
most researchers are still unaware of them.

As far as authors getting peer-review, editing, etc., for free: Journal
publishers have been getting manuscripts free from authors for centuries.

Mark Funk
Head, Collection Development
Weill Cornell Medical Library
1300 York Avenue
New York, NY 10021
mefunk@mail.med.cornell.edu