[GOAL] Re: Why should publishers agree to Green OA?

[Garret McMahon]

Alicia,

This is the first time I've heard mention of Elsevier's Green OA policy
predicated on an institutional mandate. Up to now, IR deposit of the
author's peer-reviewed accepted draft on acceptance for publication has
been central to funding council policies on OA. Are you saying that deposit
on that basis alone contravenes Elsevier's position in the absence of
an institutional OA policy?

Regards,

Garret McMahon

Queen's University Belfast




On 20 June 2012 08:53, Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF) <A.Wise at elsevier.com> wrote:

>  Hi all,****
>
> ** **
>
> Just a quick point of clarification…. Elsevier doesn’t forbid posting if
> there is a mandate.  We ask for an agreement with the institution that has
> the mandate, and there is no cost for these agreements.  The purpose of
> these agreements is to work out a win-win solution to find a way for the
> underlying journals in which academics choose to publish to be sustainable
> even if there are high posting rates. ****
>
> ** **
>
> With kind wishes,****
>
> ** **
>
> Alicia****
>
> ** **
>
> Dr Alicia Wise****
>
> Director of Universal Access****
>
> Elsevier I The Boulevard I Langford Lane I Kidlington I Oxford I OX5 1GB**
> **
>
> M: +44 (0) 7823 536 826 I E: a.wise at elsevier.com****
>
> *Twitter: @wisealic*
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Peter Murray-Rust
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 19, 2012 7:23 PM
> *To:* Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
> *Subject:* [GOAL] Why should publishers agree to Green OA?****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> I have some simple questions about Green OA. I don't know the answers.****
>
>
> * is there any *contractual* relationship between a Green-publisher and
> any legal body? Or is Green simply a permission granted unilaterally by
> publishers when they feel like it, and withdrawable when they don't.
> * if Green starts impacting on publishers' revenues (and I understand this
> is part of the Green strategy - when we have 100% Green then publishers
> will have to change) what stops them simply withdrawing the permission? Or
> rationing it? Or any other anti-Green measure
> * Do publishers receive any funding from anywhere for allowing Green?
> Green is extra work for them - why should they increase the amount they do?
> * Is there any body which regularly "negotiates" with publishers such as
> ACS, who categorically forbid Green for now and for ever.
>
> Various publishers seem to indicate that they will allow Green as long as
> it's a relatively small percentage. But, as Stevan has noted, if your
> institution mandates Green, then Elsevier forbids it. So I cannot see why,
> if Green were to reach - say - 50%, the publishers wouldn't simply ration
> it and prevent 100%.
>
> ****
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069****
>
> Elsevier Limited. Registered Office: The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom, Registration No. 1982084 (England and Wales).
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL at eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120620/f23e5ee5/attachment.html