[GOAL] Re: Fwd: Institutions: Ignore Elsevier Take-Down Notices (and Mandate Immediate-Deposit)

[Peter Murray-Rust]

On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Jan Velterop <velterop at gmail.com> wrote:

If "The Right to Read is the Right to Mine"  is taken without any
> qualification, then you can forget subscription publishers cooperating with
> any form of free access to the published version.
>

Why?  Many publishers - such as the Royal Society have announced exactly
that. If I (my univ) pays for ProcRoySoc then I have the right to mine it.

My proposal does provide an incentive to add value to what publishers get
> paid for via subscriptions. The slogan could be "Paying to read is paying
> to mine".
>
>
I think there is a misunderstanding. My slogan expands to "If I have the
right to read a document by whatever means, including paying for it, then I
have the right to mine it".  The STM publishers are saying "if you have a
right to read it by paying a subscription you have no right to ine it and
will require an additional licence from us".

That right to read doesn't exist as far as subscription content is
> concerned unless the subscription is paid for. If it is paid for, one
> should be able to read 'ocularly' as well as with machines, and TDM the
> content. I fully agree. But a free published version with just 'ocular'
> rights should exist simultaneously, instead of just relying on the
> fragmented, cumbersome access, and variable quality and functionality
> 'green' offers.
>
> The TA publishers fought this, we walked out, and Neelie Kroes has
> declared we should start afresh and have a different non-licence approach.
>
>
> I'd love to hear Neelie Kroes's views on my proposal. And for the
> avoidance of doubt: if one has paid for subscription content, one should
> have the right to TDM.
>
>
I cannot see how TA publishers would adopt your approach without extra
payment or reducing the ocular product (e.g. by DRM'ing , making it
self-destruct after 30 seconds, not allowing printing, using font size 4,
etc.).  They would then split the subscription material into ocular
material of better quality and then charge even more for XML.



-- 
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/20131220/375d9775/attachment.html