[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Future of the "subscription model?"
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Future of the "subscription model?"
- From: Ann Okerson <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 20:21:01 EDT
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Sender: email@example.com
Anyone want to consider the rise or fall the subscription model outside of journals, which has been the discussion so far? On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Ann Okerson wrote: > Fred: In library training, we learned that the basic > definition of serials is "publications intended to be continued > indefinitely." (Or at least for some time to come.) By my > lights, then, a "subscription" represents any ongoing, regular > payment for such continuing publications. > > Does this help with definitions? Ann > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 8:21 PM, FrederickFriend > <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > >> Well, Ann, if you wanted to start a controversial thread, I >> suspect you will have succeeded! Let me ask for clarification >> on the definition of the topic. I assume that you are asking >> about subscriptions in relation to journals or works in >> series. And I wonder how precise you want to be in your >> definition of "subscription"? I am not sure, for example, that >> a "big deal" counts as a subscription. I have thought of a >> "big deal" as being a licence for a specific period of time, >> and - in my view - part of the problem we have currently is >> that "big deals" have swallowed up journals which would >> otherwise be available on subscription. Anybody who knows me >> will not be surprised to learn that I see OA models as >> replacing both "big deals" and individual subscriptions to a >> large extent, but there will certainly be disagreement amongst >> liblicense subscribers about the extent and the timing of that >> development. >> >> Fred Friend