<div dir="ltr">On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Bjoern Brembs <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:b.brembs@gmail.com" target="_blank">b.brembs@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Friday, November 15, 2013, 1:09:13 AM, you wrote:<br>
<br>
> The political approach may be necessary to get OA<br>
> enacted, but we need to implement OA in such a way that it<br>
> is immune from political influence. In my book, that seems<br>
> to be a perfect role for libraries.<br>
<br>
This is a serious problem with mandates: they are liable to political influence - and billions in $$$ pay for plenty of political influence, way more than we can ever dream of having.<br>
<br>
I thus support Eric's motion: we need to move everything in-house, away from any political influence. Libraries are the natural place for that.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I patiently await Bjoern's or Eric's practical explanation of how libraries are going to get researchers to provide OA.</div>
<div><br></div><div>(Till I hear, I'm sticking to Green OA mandates. And malign political influence can be countered by benign. The publishing lobby has more money. But there are far more of us researchers; and whereas our governments may be susceptible to publisher lobbying, our funders are less so, and our institutions still less so: and it's the latter two that do the mandating…)</div>
<div><br></div><div>Stevan Harnad</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div>