Friday, March 15. 2013
Divide & Conquer
The new Finch/RCUK policy started off on the wrong foot from the very beginning, downgrading cost-free Green OA self-archiving and preferentially funding Gold OA publishing: double-paid Fool's Gold. That was already at the behest of the publishing lobby. But unfortunately that was aided and abetted by OA advocates in the thrall of Gold Fever and Rights Rapture, needlessly over-reaching for more than just the free online access that is already within reach, and making even that yet again escape our grasp. Yes, the publisher lobby is trying to divide and conquer.
But it will not succeed, because the HEFCE/REF mandate proposal has come to the rescue, dividing deposit and access-setting, requiring that deposit be immediate, in the author's IR, and relegating publishers' embargoes only to access-setting. It is that dividing that will conquer.
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
No comments
Add Comment
|
Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To leave a comment you must approve it via e-mail, which will be sent to your address after submission. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To leave a comment you must approve it via e-mail, which will be sent to your address after submission.
|
|
|
|
|
| Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed. | |
EnablingOpenScholarship (EOS)
Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA)
Alliance for Taxpayer Access (ATA)
Creative Commons License:
Quicksearch
Syndicate This Blog
-
RSS 0.91 feed
-
RSS 1.0 feed
-
RSS 2.0 feed
-
ATOM 0.3 feed
-
ATOM 1.0 feed
-
RSS 2.0 Comments
-
OPML 1.0 feed
Materials You Are Invited To Use To Promote OA Self-Archiving:
The American Scientist Open Access Forum has been chronicling and often directing the course of progress in providing Open Access to Universities' Peer-Reviewed Research Articles since its inception in the US in 1998 by the American Scientist, published by the Sigma Xi Society.
The Forum is largely for policy-makers at universities, research institutions and research funding agencies worldwide who are interested in institutional Open Acess Provision policy. (It is not a general discussion group for serials, pricing or publishing issues: it is specifically focussed on institutional Open Acess policy.)
You can sign on to the Forum here.
Archives
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- Recent...
- Older...
Calendar
|
|
February '16 | |||||
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | ||||||
Categories
- Copyright
- Definition of Open Access
- Institutional Repositories
- Learned Societies
- Methodology
- News
- OA Impact Advantage
- Open Source
- Peer Review
- Publishing Costs
- Publishing Lobby
- Publishing Reform
- Rationale for OA
- Research Assessment
- Scientometrics
- Self-Archiving Mandates
- Whimsy
All categories
Blog Administration
Open login screen
Statistics
Last entry: 2016-01-05 12:20
1103 entries written
234 comments have been made
Top Referrers
Syndicate This Blog
-
RSS 0.91 feed
-
RSS 1.0 feed
-
RSS 2.0 feed
-
ATOM 0.3 feed
-
ATOM 1.0 feed
-
RSS 2.0 Comments
-
OPML 1.0 feed