On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Jean-Claude Guédon < jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca> wrote:
The reference to free Gold journals covered by subscriptions is not clear > to me. Is this a reference to SCOAP3? > It's a reference to all subscription journals that make their online version freely accessible online (immediately upon publication). (No, SCOAP3 is a premature and unnecessary post-hoc consortial "membership" scheme that I think will not prove sustainable. The HEP fields have already provided near 100% (Green) OA for 20 years, un-mandated. What's needed next is for institutions and funders to mandate that all other disciplines do likewise.) Stevan Harnad Le jeudi 18 avril 2013 à 07:45 +0100, Stevan Harnad a écrit : > > 1. The Green/Gold Open Access (OA) distinction concerns whether it is the > author or the publisher that provides the OA. > > 2. This distinction was important to mark with clear terms because the > conflation of the two roads to OA has practical implications and has been > holding up OA progress for a decade and a half. > > 3. The distinction between paid Gold and free Gold is very far from being > a straightforward one. > > 4. Free Gold can be free (to the author) because the expenses of the Gold > journal are covered by subscriptions, subsidies or volunteerism. > > 5. The funds for Paid Gold can come from the author's pocket, the author's > research grant, the author's institution or the author's funder. > > 6. It would be both absurd and gratuitously confusing to mark each of > these economic-model differences with a color-code. > > 7. Superfluous extra colors would also obscure the role that the > colour-code was invented to perform: distinguishing author-side OA > provision from publisher-side OA provision. > > 8. So, please, let's not have "diamond," "platinum" and "titanium" > OA<http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/993-.html>, > despite the metallurgical temptations. > > 9. They amplify noise instead of pinpointing the signal, just as > SHERPA/Romeo<http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/453-SHERPARoMEO-Publishers-with-Paid-Options-for-Open-Access.html>'s > parti-colored Blue/Yellow/Green > spectrum<http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeoinfo.html#colours>(mercifully ignored > by almost everyone) does. > > 10. OA is about providing Open Access to peer-reviewed journal articles, > not about cost-recovery models for OA publishing (Gold OA). > > 11. The Gold that publishers are fighting for and that researcher funders > are subsidizing (whether "pure" or "hybrid") is paid Gold, not free Gold. > > 12. No one knows whether or how free Gold will be sustainable, any more > than they know whether or how long subscription publishing can co-exist > viably with mandatory Green OA. > > 13. So please leave the economic ideology and speculation out of the > pragmatics of OA policy making by the research community (institutions and > funders). > > 14. Cost-recovery models are the province of publishers (Gold OA). > > 15. What the research community needs to do is mandate OA provision. > > 16. The only OA provision that is entirely in the research community's > hands is Green OA. > > And, before you ask, please let's not play into the publishers' hands by > colour-coding OA also in terms of the length of the publisher embargo: > 3-month OA, 6-month OA, 12-month-OA, 24-month-OA, millennial OA: OA means > *immediate online access*. Anything else is delayed access. (The only > quasi-exception is the > "Almost-OA<http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/839-Publisher-OA-Embargoes,-IDOA-Mandates-and-the-Almost-OA-Button.html>" > provided by the author via the institutional repository's > email-eprint-request Button when complying with publisher embargoes -- but > that too is clearly *not OA,* which is immediate, free online access.) > > And on no account should the genuine, substantive distinction between Gratis > OA <http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/442-guid.html>(free > online access) and Libre > OA <http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/442-guid.html>(free > online access plus various re-use rights) be color-coded (with a > different shade for every variety of CC license)! > > Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, > Y, Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H., & Hilf, E. (2004) The Access/Impact > Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open > Access<http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/10209/>. > Serials Review 30. Shorter version: The green and the gold roads to Open > Access <http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/accessdebate/21.html>. *Nature > Web Focus*. > >
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
