<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Beall, Jeffrey <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Jeffrey.Beall@ucdenver.edu" target="_blank">Jeffrey.Beall@ucdenver.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I make the distinction between gold open-access and platinum open-access.<br>
<br>
Author fees + free to reader = gold open access<br>
No author fees + free to reader = platinum open access<br>
<br>
This discussion, I think, demonstrates that this distinction is significant and worthy of a separate appellation.<br></blockquote><div><br>I assume that "free" means "as in speech" (Stallman) and effectively BOAI-compliant, otherwise it overlaps significantly with Green. If so and if we are forced to use semantic-free labels such as G and G, I support this in general. But the terminology and permissions must be clear, else we end up with Wiley's "fully open" which allows almost zero re-use other than eyeballs.<br>
<br>OTOH it would be much clearer if we actually used a labelling system which clearly denoted permissions, availability, cost, price, etc. <br><br>P.<br><br><br></div></div>-- <br>Peter Murray-Rust<br>Reader in Molecular Informatics<br>
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry<br>University of Cambridge<br>CB2 1EW, UK<br>+44-1223-763069<br>