[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: potential positive spiral in transition to open access
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: Re: potential positive spiral in transition to open access
- From: "Joseph J. Esposito" <espositoj@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 15:22:00 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Another way to slice the data would be to contrast subscription publications with two kinds of Open Access: "pure" OA, in which the content is entirely supported by the OA enterprise (e.g., author fees or institutional sponsorship); and "parasitic" or "free-rider" OA, in which the OA content is subsidized in some way by a subscription program. An example of free-rider OA would be material that an author deposits into an institutional repository that is similar to formally published content. BioMedCentral and PLoS are both examples of pure OA. All of the programs discussed in relation to the NIH that I am familiar with have a free-rider component.
Probably the largest class of free-rider OA is material that is made OA after an embargo (say, 6 or 12 months). I call this subcategory "catch-and-release Open Access." The rationale for catch-and-release escapes me, but many publishers, including commercial ones, have such a policy.
Joe Esposito
----- Original Message -----
From: <matt@biomedcentral.com>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 10:04 PM
Subject: RE: potential positive spiral in transition to open access
Sally, Something which seems to be missing from the article cited is a comparison with subscription journals. Clearly, there is turnover of subscription journals just as there is turnover of open access journals. Every year, some number of new subscription journals are launched, while a significant number cease publication. I don't know whether the ratio of the number of launches to the number of closures is any different between subscription journals vs OA titles, but in principle, that could be measured. On the other hand, it still wouldn't prove a great deal. E.g. The fact that a large fraction of internet ecommerce startups failed is not an indication that ecommerce is unimportant or uneconomic. What's more important is the scale and significance of those that succeed. Ditto with OA journals. Matt
- Prev by Date: Re: Correction (RE: Thatcher vs. Harnad)
- Next by Date: RE: potential positive spiral in transition to open access
- Previous by thread: Re: potential positive spiral in transition to open access
- Next by thread: RE: potential positive spiral in transition to open access
- Index(es):