<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Laurent Romary <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:laurent.romary@inria.fr" target="_blank">laurent.romary@inria.fr</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>With all respect, Stevan, I am not sure it is worth answering publishers' policy tricks with deposit hacks. The core question is: does Elsevier fulfills, by making such statements, its duties as service provider in the domain of scholarly communication. If not, we, as institutions, have to be clear as to what we want, enforce the corresponding policy (i.e. we determine what and in which way we want our publications to be disseminated) and inform the communities accordingly.<br>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I agree with Laurent. We should assert our rights and - if we could act coherently - we would be able to get them implemented. There is no legal reason why we cannot assert a zero-month embargo - we are just afraid of the publishers rather than believers in our own power. (It wouldn't hurt the publishers as repositories are not yet a credible resource for bulk readership).<br>
<br></div><div>Libraries (including Cambridge) seem to sign any contract the publisher puts in front of them - they only challenge price, not use and re-use. In a recent mail on OA the process on Green (paraphrased) was "we'll see what embargo periods the publishers mandate" [and then enforce them]. whereas it should have been "we - the world - demand access to knowledge and will not accept embargos". That's a clear starting point.<br>
<br></div>I could believe in Green OA if it were boldly carried out and repositories actually worked for readers (including machines). As it is we have "nearly OA" - i.e. not visible. And "OA/ID" - visible at some unspecified time in the future.<br>
<br></div><div class="gmail_quote">If the OA community could get a single clear goal then it might start to be effective for the #scholarlypoor, such as Jack Andraka whose parents buy him pay per view for medical papers.<br>
<br></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
</div></div>