[GOAL] Re: Hat Tip: Let's not leave Humanities behind in the dash for open access

[Peter Murray-Rust]

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Beall, Jeffrey
<Jeffrey.Beall at ucdenver.edu>wrote:

> I make the distinction between gold open-access and platinum open-access.
>
>         Author fees + free to reader = gold open access
>         No author fees + free to reader = platinum open access
>
> This discussion, I think, demonstrates that this distinction is
> significant and worthy of a separate appellation.
>

I assume that "free" means "as in speech" (Stallman)  and effectively
BOAI-compliant,  otherwise it overlaps significantly with Green. If so and
if we are forced to use semantic-free labels such as G and G, I support
this in general. But the terminology and permissions must be clear, else we
end up with Wiley's "fully open" which allows almost zero re-use other than
eyeballs.

OTOH it would be much clearer if we actually used a labelling system which
clearly denoted permissions, availability, cost, price, etc.

P.


-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120726/c7867831/attachment.html