[GOAL] Re: When Gold OA isn't free to non-subscribers!!

[Graham Triggs]

On 27 March 2014 07:37, Andrew A. Adams <aaa at meiji.ac.jp> wrote:

> >
> https://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2014/03/26/elseviergate-elsevier-is-still-charging-for-open-access-even-after-i-have-told-them-wellcome-should-take-them-to-court/
> > Elseviergate;
> > Elsevier is STILL charging for Open Access even after I
> > have told them. Wellcome should take them to court
>
> > Someone needs to take formal action against Elsevier. Like taking them
> > to court. In this case Wellcome.
>
> This is yet another reason to prefer the Green route to Open Access.


Although if you are relying on the Green route alone, then it may not be
available immediately, you may not necessarily be retaining ownership,
other people may still have to pay for rights to use your article as they
wish to.

You may not be concerned with those issues, but if you are, then you may
still need to take a "Gold" option to have them. That doesn't mean that you
don't need to archive the paper / distribute it in many different places -
you absolutely should (that is, after all, what you've paid for).


> Hybrid
> Open Access depends on the publisher actually making the paper freely
> available, while their infrasutrcture is set up, and the incentives are in
> place, for them to default technically to closed access if they have any
> doubt or difficulty about the status ofthat article. Even Gold OA can have
> its problems. I published a paper in the then-new then-OA journal Policy
> and
> Internet in 2010. Last year I happened to follow the link on my own website
> to find that the link was broken, the journal had moved to Wiley and had
> become toll access.


As you point out, iIt's not just a question of the publisher failing to
provide Open Access (which absolutely is a legal / contractual issue, and
you have every right to take formal action to ensure that the contract is
honoured). But what if the publisher goes bankrupt? There may not be an
incentive for another publisher to take over the back-catalog of content
and continue providing Open Access to it (there often is an incentive to
take it and make it available as part of a continuing revenue stream - e.g.
subscription access).

Many publishers do take appropriate action to address such scenarios -
participating in LOCKSS, depositing in PubMed Central, etc. But
fundamentally it comes back to the authors (and/or funders) to ensure that
they have (and will have in perpetuity) the access provision that they care
about - using multiple routes, as appropriate.

G
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20140327/f861d1dd/attachment.html