Re: Springer Open Choice uptake affects 2011 journal pricing

[Jan Velterop <velteropvonleyden@btinternet.com>]

Fred,

You say "If OA does not reduce costs to libraries, then I'm not 
sure what is its purpose." It is the argument I have spent a 
decade refuting. OA may well reduce library costs. I have no 
doubt that it will, and it may even make the library journal 
acquisition function redundant. But it's *not* the *purpose* of 
OA. The purpose of OA is the furtherance of science in the best 
possible way, ensuring that every researcher has unencumbered 
access to the knowledge gathered and discovered in scientific 
pursuits, anywhere in the world. The effects on libraries are 
collateral effects. The hope for cost reductions may well have 
secured librarians' support for OA, but it was never the purpose, 
let alone the sole purpose, as you seem to imply.

Best,

Jan

On 29 Jun 2010, at 04:06, Fred.Jenkins@notes.udayton.edu wrote:
> Jan,
>
> I am not defining fair nor do I have any interest in doing so; I
> will make decisions about subscriptions based on circumstances
> and price as always.  But is evident from your original post and
> this reply that your definition of "fair" is whatever maintains
> or increases publisher revenues.  If OA does not reduce costs to
> libraries, then I'm not sure what is its purpose.  All we are
> doing then is moving the deck chairs.  In any case, the system is
> broken; if you want to hasten it to its grave that is your
> lookout.  The stock market and real estate bubbles went on far
> longer than any rational person would have thought, but they
> crashed in the end.  No doubt the journal bubble will as well.
>
> cheers,
> FJ
>
> Fred W. Jenkins, Ph.D.
> Associate Dean for Collections & Operations
>    & Professor
> University of Dayton Libraries
>