[GOAL] Re: University of California Faculty Senate Passes Open Access Policy

[Stevan Harnad]

> From: Joseph Esposito 
> 
> Harnad writes that "a minority [of publishers] want a one-year
> embargo."  I doubt that that is true.  Most publishers are trying to
> accommodate the needs and interests of funding agencies, society
> members, librarians, and the general public.  I doubt very much that
> many publishers are happy with only a one-year embargo. Policies of
> this kind represent difficult compromises. 

I didn't say they liked a 1-year embargo. Perhaps in place of "want,"
which is ambiguous, I should have said ""a minority [of publishers] 
demand a one-year embargo." The majority of publishers do not
demand any embargo at all. (I don't doubt that among those that do,
some would prefer a longer one…)

Stevan Harnad

> 
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 8:13 AM, LIBLICENSE <liblicense at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum at gmail.com>
>> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 10:34:28 -0400
>> 
>> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 on Liblicense, LIBLICENSE Ari Belenkiy wrote:
>> 
>>> First, by definition, the Green OA is "a deposit of PRE-peer-reviewed article on author's website".
>> 
>> Incorrect. By definition Green OA is immediate, permanent toll-free
>> online access to the post-peer-reviewed "postprint", provided by the
>> author (on any website, institutional or central).
>> 
>>> The only way publishers can agree on this is for a back payment - this appears to be made by
>>> institutions and not by the authors (a version of the Gold OA).
>> 
>> Nothing of the sort. The majority of journals endorse immediate,
>> unembargoed Green OA.
>> 
>> A minority want a 1-year embargo.
>> 
>> The solution is to mandate immediate deposit of all articles; authors
>> can then provide immediate Green OA for the majority, and
>> Button-mediated "Almost OA" during the embargo for the embargoed
>> minority.
>> 
>> No payment for any of this. Publication is already paid for via
>> subscriptions, for subscription journals. And Gold OA payments have
>> nothing whatsoever to do with any of this.
>> 
>>> Am I right? Then who in the institution will decide for which submission
>>> to pay and for which not?
>> 
>> You are wrong. You are conflating preprint and postprint, Green OA and
>> Gold OA. I suggest doing a little background reading on basic concepts
>> and developments in OA. There's not much, and you will understand it
>> quickly once you read about it. But just going by the words in
>> postings, and their free associations with what one thinks they might
>> mean will not get one anywhere. You might start with the
>> self-archiving FAQ.
>> 
>> Stevan Harnad

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20130819/26500757/attachment.html