<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On 27 March 2014 07:37, Andrew A. Adams <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:aaa@meiji.ac.jp" target="_blank">aaa@meiji.ac.jp</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div class="">> <a href="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/" target="_blank">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/</a><br>
> Elseviergate;<br>
> Elsevier is STILL charging for Open Access even after I<br>
> have told them. Wellcome should take them to court<br>
<br>
> Someone needs to take formal action against Elsevier. Like taking them<br>
> to court. In this case Wellcome.<br>
<br>
</div>This is yet another reason to prefer the Green route to Open Access.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>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.<br>
<br></div><div>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).<br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> Hybrid<br>
Open Access depends on the publisher actually making the paper freely<br>
available, while their infrasutrcture is set up, and the incentives are in<br>
place, for them to default technically to closed access if they have any<br>
doubt or difficulty about the status ofthat article. Even Gold OA can have<br>
its problems. I published a paper in the then-new then-OA journal Policy and<br>
Internet in 2010. Last year I happened to follow the link on my own website<br>
to find that the link was broken, the journal had moved to Wiley and had<br>
become toll access.</blockquote><div><br><div>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).<br></div><br></div><div>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.<br>
</div><br></div>G<br></div></div>