[GOAL] Re: Hybrid Open Access

[Laura Quilter]

Can you clarify regarding instances of CCC RightsLink demanding payments
for OA reuse?  I'd really like to know details.

----------------------------------
Laura Markstein Quilter / lquilter at lquilter.net

*Attorney, Geek, Militant Librarian, Teacher*
Copyright and Information Policy Librarian
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
lquilter at library.umass.edu

Lecturer, Simmons College, GSLIS
laura.quilter at simmons.edu




On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 6:08 AM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:

> Moving the discussion to a new title...
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 9:16 AM, David Prosser <david.prosser at rluk.ac.uk>wrote:
>
>>
>> What my paper missed and what may have been obvious at the time, but
>> which I only saw with hindsight, were the biggest problems with the model:
>>
>> 1. There is little incentive for the publisher to set a competitive APC.
>>  It is clear that in most cases APCs for hybrids are higher than APCs for
>> born-OA journals.  But as the hybrid is gaining the majority of its revenue
>> from subscriptions why set a lower APC - if any author wants to pay it then
>> it is just a bonus.  Of course, this helps explains the low take-up rate
>> for OA in most hybrid journals - why pay a hight fee when you can get
>> published in that journal for free?  And if you really want OA then best go
>> to a born-OA journal which is cheaper and may well be of comparable quality.
>>
>> 2. There is little pressure on the publisher to reduce subscription
>> prices.  Of course, everybody says 'we don't double dip', but this is
>> almost impossible to verify and  from a subscriber's point of view very
>> difficult to police.  I don't know of any institution, for example, in a
>> multi-year big deal who has received a rebate based on OA hybrid content.
>>
>>
>> There are several other concerns about "hybrid":
>
> * the unacceptable labelling and licensing of many TA publishers. Many
> hybrid papers are not identified as OA of any sort, others are labelled
> with confusing words "Free content". Many do not have licences, some have
> incompatible rights.
> * many are linked to RightsLink which demand payment (often huge) for Open
> Access reuse
> * many deliberately use Non-BOAI compliant licences. One editor mailed me
> today and said the the publisher was urging them to use NC-ND as it
> protected authors from exploitation.
> * they are not easily discoverable. I mailed the Director of Universal
> Access at Elsevier asking for a complete list of OA articles and she
> couldn't give it to me. I had to use some complex database query - I have
> no idea how reliable that was.
>
> Leaving aside the costing of hybrid, if someone has paid for Open Access
> then it should be:
>
> * clearly licensed on splash page, HTML, and PDFs.
> * the XML should be available
> * there should be a complete list of all OA articles from that publisher.
>
> Currently I am indexing and extracting facts from PLoSONE and BMC on a
> daily basis. Each of these does exactly what I need:
> * lists all new articles every day
> * has a complete list of all articles ever published
> * collaborates with scientists like me to make it easy to iterate over all
> the content.
>
> It is easy to get the impression that TA publishers don't care about these
> issues. BMC and PLoS (and the OASPAs) do it properly - an honest product.
>
> Any publisher who wishes to be respected for their OA offerings has to do
> the minimum of what I list here:
> * CC-BY
> * list of all articles
> * easy machine iteration and retrieval.
>
> Anything else is holding back progress
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131217/1ebc29c4/attachment.html