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

[Reme Melero]

ELSEVIER FUNDING BODY AGREEMENTS & POLICIES says in its second paragraph:

"The agreements and policies are intended to support the needs of 
Elsevier authors, editors and society publishing partners, and to 
protect the quality and integrity of the peer-review process"

Does it mean that the $3,000 serve to pay the insurance of the "quality 
and integrity of peer review? what if others do not pay? quality and 
integrity is not protected? of course not,  the quality and integrity is 
given by authors, reviewers and scientific editors, who, generally 
belong to  academic and research institutions.

Good morning

Reme

-
Reme Melero
Científico Titular CSIC
IATA
Avda Agustin Escardino 7, 46980 Paterna, Valencia
Tel 963900022 ext 3121
www.accesoabierto.net






According with the El 20/06/2012 11:43, Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF) escribió:
>
> Hi Garrett,
>
> It depends on the funding body -- I'm not clear which specific funding 
> council you have in mind.  Those we already have agreements with are 
> described here: 
> http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/authorsview.authors/fundingbodyagreements 
>
>
> With kind wishes,
>
> Alicia//
>
> *From:* goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] *On 
> Behalf Of *Garret McMahon
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 20, 2012 9:27 AM
> *To:* Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
> *Subject:* [GOAL] Re: Why should publishers agree to Green OA?
>
> 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 
> <mailto: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 <tel:%2B44%20%280%29%207823%20536%20826> I E: 
> a.wise at elsevier.com <mailto:a.wise at elsevier.com>
>
> *Twitter: @wisealic*
>
> *From:* goal-bounces at eprints.org <mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org> 
> [mailto: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 <tel:%2B44-1223-763069>
>
> 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 <mailto:GOAL at eprints.org>
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
> 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


-- 
Reme Melero
Científico Titular CSIC
IATA
Avda Agustin Escardino 7, 46980 Paterna, Valencia
Tel 963900022 ext 3121
www.accesoabierto.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120620/cbc875fb/attachment-0001.html