[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Fwd: US University OA Resolutions Omit MostImportantComponent
- To: <david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk>, <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: Fwd: US University OA Resolutions Omit MostImportantComponent
- From: "Lisa Dittrich" <lrdittrich@aamc.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 23:50:37 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
That's fine. We could (1) kill the publishing industry entirely and do what the Dutch have done (obviously not something I want or even something I think is good or in the public interest necessarily, but it's a real option) and just make big repositories of content or (2) create, as some have clearly suggested but which I believe are unrealistic, alternative sources of funding publication through author/institution/funder pays models. I honestly do not see any other middle ground. And there is a difference between forcing an author who has been given grant money to report back to an agency on what he/she has done (admittedly reasonable) and asking a publisher who has invested money to seek no return on that investment. Lisa Dittrich Managing Editor Academic Medicine 2450 N Street NW Washington,D.C. 20037 lrdittrich@aamc.org (e-mail) 202-828-0590 (phone) 202-828-4798 (fax) Academic Medicine's Web site: www.academicmedicine.org >>> david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk 05/13/05 12:56 AM >>> In these discussions about authors doing, or being forced to do, what is 'good for them' we appear to forget that we already force authors to do 'what is good for them'. For example: In return for providing research grants we force researchers to deposit gene sequences, protein sequences, etc. It is not to the benefit of the individual researcher to deposit, they don't volunteer, but we recognise the value of it being done and so insist on it. In doing so we create databases that are of benefit to all researchers. In return for providing research grants we force researchers to write and file end-of-project reports. Again, researchers don't volunteer to write these reports, but we recognise the value of having a reporting step and insist on it. In return for providing (significant) research grants the NIH is now insisting on strategies to make data available. The researchers are not queuing-up to volunteer, but NIH sees it as important and so forces researchers to 'do the right thing'. ... David C Prosser PhD SPARC Europe E-mail: david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk
- Prev by Date: RE: Berkeley faculty statement on scholarly publishing
- Next by Date: Re: Berkeley faculty statement on scholarly publishing
- Previous by thread: Dutch academics declare research free-for-all
- Next by thread: Visit to NASIG
- Index(es):