---- Jane Shevtsov <jane....@gmail.com> wrote: > To be fair, ESA's profit margin is much smaller than that of commercial > publishers. But I wonder how much of that money comes from people paying > outrageous sums for individual articles. Not much, I'll bet. > > There would seem to be a simple technical solution. Just as IP addresses > are currently used to check whether someone is at a subscribing > institution, they could be used to see whether an article request is coming > from someone at a university. If yes, they'd only have access if their > library subscribed (or if they had an individual subscription). > Non-institutional users would get free access.
Hmmmm. Jane, perhaps you might include sorts of institutions other than universities, such as government agencies, industrial organizations (why should Exon Mobil get a free ride?), NGOs? Suppose a student or faculty member works at home at night, and makes the request from there? Free then, but if he makes the request from his office or a laboratory, he gets dinged? Fact is, the publisher has to recoup costs and costs for a a scholarly organization include things other than publishing. When students first get into this game most are unaware that authors pay for preprints (including electronic preprints) and pay page charges for publication. That being the case, why shouldn't the publisher offset some costs by charging users for access? ESA and most scholarly organizations that publish journals are truly nonprofit. Elsevier Press is another matter, and "There oughta be a law ........... ." So far as the university library is concerned, the universal copyright agreement that allows interlibrary loan is something akin to what you suggest: If a library makes more than five requests from a journal in a year, then the library is expected to subscribe. In other words, requests beyond five would be a copyright violation. > > Jane Shevtsov > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 2:39 PM, M.S. Patterson <tertiarym...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > David, you're correct that many libraries have subscriptions to various > > journals, and are capable of getting an article via interlibrary loan. > > > > However, this is simply a case of passing the buck. Do you think > > publishers give free access to libraries and universities? > > They do not. The subscription fees that libraries pay are exceedingly > > steep, and as library budgets have been getting slashed, many have been > > cutting back substantially on their journal access, counting on others > > within the library system to maintain subscriptions. And, of course, every > > interlibrary loan request costs time, labor, and money to the communities > > involved. Surely it is more socially efficient to charge a few dollars for > > an article, and make it easily available to people, than it is to charge a > > large sum to a library, and then incur additional labor costs to shuttle a > > document around from place to place? > > > > The cost of distribution for the publishers is essentially nil, given that > > they already have invested in the sites in place to distribute their > > articles, whether they cost $50 or $2. Electrons are quite cheap. This is > > a simple case of an industry with substantial monopoly power engaging in > > rent seeking. A simple search on "academic publisher profits" would be > > extremely enlightening, I suspect. Here is a good place to start: > > http://www.economist.com/node/**18744177<http://www.economist.com/node/18744177> > > > > -m > > > > > > On 1/9/2012 9:51 AM, David L. McNeely wrote: > > > >> ---- Jane Shevtsov<jane....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> I just checked, and ESA charges nonsubscribers $20 for a single article > >>> published in the December 2011 issue of Ecology. How is that reasonable? > >>> And I'm no business maven, but isn't that far past the optimal price > >>> point > >>> in terms of revenue generation? I could see paying $2 or $3 for an > >>> article > >>> if I was an infrequent reader, but $20? > >>> > >>> There's a good blog post on what alternatives publishers might support > >>> at< > >>> http://researchremix.**wordpress.com/2012/01/07/what-** > >>> should-the-publishers-lobby-**for/<http://researchremix.wordpress.com/2012/01/07/what-should-the-publishers-lobby-for/> > >>> > >>>> . > >>>> > >>> Is it really so difficult to get a paper? I have never been unable to > >> get a paper I wanted or needed, and I have never paid the high prices that > >> publishers demand for instant access on the internet. Most of us live > >> within 50 miles of a library. If the library does not subscribe to the > >> journal in which the paper appears, interlibrary loan will get it for a > >> reasonable cost. The real problem is the demand for instant gratification > >> that we have developed. It is that that we are being asked to pay for. > >> > >> Should a paper cost $50? I really don't know what it costs the journal > >> to produce the paper, what the demand is (well, for some papers the demand > >> is virtually nothing), or what distribution costs. I do know that such > >> services as BioOne have greatly improved the bottom lines of some scholarly > >> organizations, which in the long run makes papers more available, not less. > >> > >> I guess in this one instance I am suggesting that free market is not so > >> bad. If you really must have the paper the instant you locate it through > >> the free search and free abstract mechanisms of the publishers, why then > >> pay the asking price. Otherwise, use more traditional means of getting it. > >> If publishers are getting the asking price, they will maintain it, or > >> maybe ask a little more. If they are not getting it, they will back off. > >> > >> If you are so far back in the sticks that you don't have ready access to > >> a library, investigate a bit. I'll bet some library serves you if you find > >> out how. If you are living in a cabin off the traveled roads and off the > >> grid, then you don't have internet access either, so your complaints about > >> no open access are moot. > >> > >> David McNeely > >> > >>> Jane Shevtsov > >>> > >>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:08 PM, M.S. > >>> Patterson<tertiarymatt@gmail.**com<tertiarym...@gmail.com> > >>> >wrote: > >>> > >>> Here's an additional opinion on the matter, and it is rather less > >>>> charitable: > >>>> http://phylogenomics.blogspot.****com/2012/01/yhgtbfkm-** > >>>> ecological-society-of-america.****html?utm_source=feedburner&**** > >>>> utm_medium=twitter&utm_****campaign=Feed%3A+**** > >>>> TheTreeOfLife+%28The+Tree+of+* > >>>> *Life%29<http://phylogenomics.**blogspot.com/2012/01/yhgtbfkm-** > >>>> ecological-society-of-america.**html?utm_source=feedburner&** > >>>> utm_medium=twitter&utm_**campaign=Feed%3A+** > >>>> TheTreeOfLife+%28The+Tree+of+**Life%29<http://phylogenomics.blogspot.com/2012/01/yhgtbfkm-ecological-society-of-america.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheTreeOfLife+%28The+Tree+of+Life%29> > >>>> >< > >>>> http://phylogenomics.**blogspo**t.com/2012/01/yhgtbfkm-**<http://blogspot.com/2012/01/yhgtbfkm-**> > >>>> ecological-society-of-america.****html?utm_source=feedburner&**** > >>>> utm_medium=twitter&utm_****campaign=Feed%3A+**** > >>>> TheTreeOfLife+%28The+Tree+of+* > >>>> *Life%29<http://phylogenomics.**blogspot.com/2012/01/yhgtbfkm-** > >>>> ecological-society-of-america.**html?utm_source=feedburner&** > >>>> utm_medium=twitter&utm_**campaign=Feed%3A+** > >>>> TheTreeOfLife+%28The+Tree+of+**Life%29<http://phylogenomics.blogspot.com/2012/01/yhgtbfkm-ecological-society-of-america.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheTreeOfLife+%28The+Tree+of+Life%29> > >>>> > > >>>> The fact that ESA forces authors to cede the copyright to their work is > >>>> offensive, IMO, even if they 'grant' the author reprint or reproduction > >>>> rights. It also means that ESA could choose to rewrite their rules such > >>>> that authors could lose rights to reprint or reproduce their own work. > >>>> Academic publishers should be granted first printing rights, with the > >>>> option to acquire additional rights at a later date, as they desire. > >>>> Nothing more. As it currently stands, ESA's policy is essentially > >>>> treating research articles as work-made-for-hire, which is ludicrous, > >>>> given > >>>> that authors must pay page charges to print the work! In essence > >>>> researchers are paying to have their work printed, while ceding all of > >>>> their rights to the publisher in the process. > >>>> > >>>> Further, I don't think anyone is suggesting that ESA should be denied > >>>> all > >>>> subscription fees (or page fees), but simply that papers should become > >>>> available publicly over time, and that any research funded by public > >>>> monies > >>>> should be available to the public sooner rather than later. Which is > >>>> entirely reasonable, and more than likely beneficial to the public. > >>>> > >>>> -m > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 1/5/2012 12:33 AM, Jane Shevtsov wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Fellow Ecologgers, > >>>>> > >>>>> Have people read ESA's response to a proposed requirement that the > >>>>> results > >>>>> of federally funded research be publicly available, possibly after an > >>>>> embargo period? It's available here. > >>>>> http://www.esa.org/pao/****policyStatements/Letters/**<http://www.esa.org/pao/**policyStatements/Letters/**> > >>>>> ESAResponsetoPublicAccessRFI20****11.pdf<http://www.esa.org/** > >>>>> pao/policyStatements/Letters/**ESAResponsetoPublicAccessRFI20**11.pdf<http://www.esa.org/pao/policyStatements/Letters/ESAResponsetoPublicAccessRFI2011.pdf> > >>>>> > > >>>>> > >>>>> I have to say I find this response somewhat disappointing. While some > >>>>> of > >>>>> the concerns raised in it are certainly valid, I believe it > >>>>> underestimates > >>>>> ecologists' desire to read an interesting new paper now rather than > >>>>> later. > >>>>> Also, kudos to ESA for allowing authors to freely post their papers > >>>>> online, > >>>>> something I relied on when I didn't have university journal access, but > >>>>> how > >>>>> is this financially different from open access? ESA's 2009 financial > >>>>> statement (the latest available online) may be of interest. > >>>>> http://www.esa.org/aboutesa/****docs/FS2009.pdf<http://www.esa.org/aboutesa/**docs/FS2009.pdf> > >>>>> <http://www.**esa.org/aboutesa/docs/FS2009.**pdf<http://www.esa.org/aboutesa/docs/FS2009.pdf> > >>>>> > > >>>>> > >>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>> > >>>>> Jane Shevtsov > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>> Matt Patterson > >>>> MSES/MPA 2012 > >>>> Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs > >>>> Center for the study of Institutions, Population and Environmental > >>>> Change > >>>> (CIPEC) > >>>> Room 226A | 408 N Indiana Ave | Bloomington, IN 47408-3799 > >>>> Environmentally Scientific Emblogulations<http://env-sci-** > >>>> blog.blogspot. <http://env-sci-blog.blogspot.>** > >>>> com<http://env-sci-blog.**blogspot.com<http://env-sci-blog.blogspot.com> > >>>> >> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> ------------- > >>> Jane Shevtsov > >>> Ecology Ph.D. candidate, University of Georgia > >>> co-founder, www.worldbeyondborders.org > >>> > >>> "She has future plans and dreams at night. > >>> They tell her life is hard; she says 'That's all right'." --Faith Hill, > >>> "Wild One" > >>> > >> -- > >> David McNeely > >> > > > > > > -- > > Matt Patterson > > MSES/MPA 2012 > > Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs > > Center for the study of Institutions, Population and Environmental Change > > (CIPEC) > > Room 226A | 408 N Indiana Ave | Bloomington, IN 47408-3799 > > Environmentally Scientific Emblogulations <http://env-sci-blog.blogspot.** > > com <http://env-sci-blog.blogspot.com>> > > > > > > -- > ------------- > Jane Shevtsov > Ecology Ph.D. candidate, University of Georgia > co-founder, www.worldbeyondborders.org > > "She has future plans and dreams at night. > They tell her life is hard; she says 'That's all right'." --Faith Hill, > "Wild One" -- David McNeely
