[GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

[Éric Archambault]

Interesting article in the Guardian that spells out the role played by Robert 
Maxwell in the development of the scholarly journal industry. 

Éric


Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for 
science?
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


Eric Archambault
1science.com
Science-Metrix.com
+1-514-495-6505 x111

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

[barry . mahon]

Interesting, especially nostalgic. However, a good start re Elsevier became the 
story of Maxwell. Pity

On June 27, 2017 8:22:08 AM GMT+01:00, "Éric Archambault" 
 wrote:
>Interesting article in the Guardian that spells out the role played by
>Robert Maxwell in the development of the scholarly journal industry. 
>
>Éric
>
>
>Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad
>for science?
>https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
>
>
>Eric Archambault
>1science.com
>Science-Metrix.com
>+1-514-495-6505 x111
>
>___
>GOAL mailing list
>GOAL@eprints.org
>http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

[Reckling, Falk]

Indeed Eric, astonishingbackground story, almost all what you have to know 
about the publishing industry and very well written,



Best Falk



Von: Éric Archambault
Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Juni 2017 09:26
An: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Betreff: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific 
publishing bad for science?



Interesting article in the Guardian that spells out the role played by Robert 
Maxwell in the development of the scholarly journal industry.

Éric


Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for 
science?
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


Eric Archambault
1science.com
Science-Metrix.com
+1-514-495-6505 x111

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

[Heather Morrison]

Indeed, great article. Building on this, a reflection: whatever one thinks of 
the ethics and legality of Elsevier's lawsuit against SciHub founder Alexandra 
Elbakyan, it appears to me that she has demonstrated that a Kazhakstani 
graduate student can provide the bulk of the important services contributed by 
Elsevier (hosting and serving up articles) at no cost to users, and apparently 
off the side of her desk. If this is correct, this says something about the 
real necessary marginal cost for providing this service, i.e. almost nothing.

Considering that academics do the real work of academic publishing - writing 
and peer review - if the traditional value add of publishers in storing and 
disseminating articles, necessary in the print and early electronic ages, can 
now be done for next to nothing, surely we can devise a new system that retains 
or strengthens quality at a fraction of the cost?

best,

--
Dr. Heather Morrison
Associate Professor
École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies
University of Ottawa
Desmarais 111-02
613-562-5800 ext. 7634
Sustaining the Knowledge Commons: Open Access Scholarship
http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/
http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html
heather.morri...@uottawa.ca

On 2017-06-27, at 11:38 AM, "Reckling, Falk" 
mailto:falk.reckl...@fwf.ac.at>>
 wrote:

Indeed Eric, astonishingbackground story, almost all what you have to know 
about the publishing industry and very well written,



Best Falk



Von: Éric Archambault
Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Juni 2017 09:26
An: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Betreff: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific 
publishing bad for science?



Interesting article in the Guardian that spells out the role played by Robert 
Maxwell in the development of the scholarly journal industry.

Éric


Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for 
science?
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


Eric Archambault
1science.com
Science-Metrix.com
+1-514-495-6505 x111

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Job opening: OpenAIRE2020 Project Officer, Göttingen State and University Library

[Birgit Schmidt]

** Apologies for cross-posting, please forward to anyone who might be 
interested **



 Project Officer (E 13 TV-L, part-time, limited-term)

06/26/2017Job openings

Göttingen State and University Library (SUB Göttingen) is engaged in 
several national and international projects in the development of 
infrastructures and services for electronic publishing and the 
implementation of Open Access / Open Science.


In this context, for the European project “OpenAIRE2020 – Open Access 
Infrastructure for Research in Europe towards 2020” and related Open 
Science projects we are seeking a


*Project Officer*

to support the ongoing OpenAIRE2020 project. This post is offered with 
immediate effect as a part-time position (currently 29,85 hrs/week, 
possibly full time, with additional hours in OpenAIRE 2020 or another 
third party funded project) on a one year term contract, with potential 
for renewal. Salary is expected to be ca. EUR 42.000 p.a. (pro rata, 
depending on experience; German salary schema for public employees, TV-L 
E13).


This position offers interesting and varied work within a dynamic 
international team in a pleasant working atmosphere. The post will 
involve a certain amount of travel both within Europe and 
internationally. The post covers support und dissemination activities 
with focus on technical developments in the context of Open Access 
infrastructures.


*Responsibilities are as follows:*

 * Development and coordination of guidelines addressing the use and
   compatibility of digital information infrastructures (digital
   repositories, research information systems, publishing platforms, etc.)
 * Advocacy and dissemination, in particular organisation of events,
   development and implementation of communication strategies and
   information materials about technical services and project
   developments,  (incl. through social media channels)
 * Contribution to research on scholarly communication and Open
   Science, literature reviews, reports and publications
 * Coordination of quality-assurance processes (review of workflows,
   services and data, SWOT assessment, development of actions, etc.)

*Essential qualifications:*

 * a Master’s degree
 * very good knowledge of technical and analytical processes,
   preferably through the coordination of the technical development of
   digital infrastructures and services (e.g. as a product owner),
   highly motivated to acquire new technical skills
 * practical knowledge of digital information management, preferably in
   the area of Open Access / Open Science, repository and data
   infrastructures
 * previous project experience including the delivery of high-profile,
   multi-agency projects, team-oriented and sustainable working style
 * excellent communication and organisational skills with a proven
   ability to work with a wide range contacts and stakeholders, high
   motivation to build up new networks, strong sense of initiative
 * very good English communication skills (spoken & written), German
   would be an asset but is not required

*Desirable qualifications:*

 * experiences in European joint initiatives
 * practical experiences in marketing and PR and commissioning management

OpenAIRE2020 represents a pivotal phase in the long-term effort to 
implement and strengthen the impact of the Open Access (OA) policies of 
the European Commission (EC), building on the achievements of the 
OpenAIRE projects.OpenAIRE2020 will expand and leverage its focus from 
1. the agents and resources of scholarly communication to workflows and 
processes, 2. from publications to data, software, and other research 
outputs, and the links between them, and 3. strengthen the relationship 
of European OA infrastructures with other regions of the world, in 
particular Latin America and the U.S. OpenAIRE2020 represents the third 
funding phase of OpenAIRE and SUB Göttingen acts as the scientific 
coordinator.


In many areas of the University of Göttingen, women are 
underrepresented. Therefore, applications from women are especially 
appreciated and will be treated preferentially in domains where women 
are particularly underrepresented, if the appropriate qualification 
profile is met and legal constraints permit. In case of equal 
qualifications, disabled persons are given preference.


If you have any questions, please contactFrau Dr. Birgit Schmidt 
(e-mail) , +49 (0) 551 39-33181 
(phone).


Please send your application with the usual documents in electronic form 
as one single pdf file*by July 21 2017*, to ouronline application portal 
. Job interviews 
are expected to start on 17 August 2017.


Note: Please note that these documents will not be returned to the 
applicants, so please do not submit any originals.



--
**
Dr. Birgit Schmidt
Scientific Manager

Goettingen State and Unive

[GOAL] Applications to Attend OpenCon 2017 in Berlin Now Open!

[Nick Shockey]

Applications to attend OpenCon 2017 on November 11-13 in Berlin, Germany
are now open! Most of those who are invited to attend will receive full or
partial travel funding, if needed.

OpenCon brings together early career researchers, librarians, and students
from around the world to connect and empower the next generation of leaders
to open up research and education in their communities. Past conferences
have featured presentations from established figures such as Jimmy Wales
(cofounder of Wikipedia) and Julia Reda (member of the European Parliament)
alongside those from early career leaders.

*Apply to attend OpenCon at http://www.opencon2017.org/apply
*

The benefits of applying for OpenCon 2017 extend far beyond attending the
Berlin event—those who apply will have the opportunity to get connected
with new collaborators, learn about scholarships to attend related
conferences, and actively participate in a larger community.  Applications
will remain open until August 1st. Attendance at OpenCon is by application
only.

*Students and early career academic professionals of all experience levels
are encouraged to apply.* OpenCon seeks to support those who have ideas for
new projects and initiatives in addition to those who are already leading
them. The most important criteria is an interest in advancing Open Access,
Open Education, and Open Data and a commitment to taking action. Learn more
about the types of projects OpenCon community members are working on and
the impact they are having through the recently released OpenCon Community
Report .

OpenCon is also looking for partners to host satellite events—meetings that
combine themes from the global conference with local presentations,
workshops, and discussions to advance the conversation around Open in your
local community. In 2016, there were 28 OpenCon satellite events in twenty
countries—all thanks to our incredible hosts
, who included students,
scientists, librarians, researchers, and advocates from around the world
who are working hard to increase action around Open Access, Open Data, and
Open Education. To express interest in hosting your own satellite event and
get more information, visit http://www.opencon2017.org/satellite

The meeting in Berlin serves as the centerpiece of a much larger network to
foster initiatives and collaboration among the next generation across
OpenCon’s issue areas. OpenCon invites you to become an active part of the
community by joining the discussion list, tuning in for monthly community
calls and webcasts, or hosting an OpenCon satellite event in your
community. Learn more at http://www.opencon2017.org/community

*More information available
at http://www.opencon2017.org/2017_applications_open
*


___
Nick Shockey
Director of Programs & Engagement, SPARC
Director, Right to Research Coalition
Phone: +1 202 296 2296
Skype: nick.shockey
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

[Donald Samulack - Editage]

I ask that the industry consider whether or not SciHub activities could
possibly be the work of one individual residing in Russia, or whether there
is something more malicious taking place instead.

 

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but it makes sense to me (and I have not
heard any serious argument otherwise) in light of recent Russian attempts to
alter the course of the US election (and others), that if Russia really
wanted to get into the computers of every research lab and academic
institution around the world, there would be no better way to do it than to
give away free research articles. Please think about this… a cover for a
phishing exercise targeting every atomic energy facility, WHO-sponsored lab,
CDC facilities, government and state labs around the world, leading academic
institutions housing the world’s cutting edge intellectual property, etc. 

 

The computing and article collating power that this single person would need
to have at her disposal to be able to have the IP change every 10 minutes
(as I understand it), archive and mirror the collections, etc. may not be
the resources and activities of a single person. We need to consider this
possibility in this new world we live in, and also consider the consequences
of not taking steps to shut down such potentially corrupt intent, if in fact
such intent is ongoing.

 

Donald Samulack

(Speaking as a concerned citizen)

 

 

From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf
Of Heather Morrison
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 1:08 PM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific
publishing bad for science?

 

Indeed, great article. Building on this, a reflection: whatever one thinks
of the ethics and legality of Elsevier's lawsuit against SciHub founder
Alexandra Elbakyan, it appears to me that she has demonstrated that a
Kazhakstani graduate student can provide the bulk of the important services
contributed by Elsevier (hosting and serving up articles) at no cost to
users, and apparently off the side of her desk. If this is correct, this
says something about the real necessary marginal cost for providing this
service, i.e. almost nothing.

 

Considering that academics do the real work of academic publishing - writing
and peer review - if the traditional value add of publishers in storing and
disseminating articles, necessary in the print and early electronic ages,
can now be done for next to nothing, surely we can devise a new system that
retains or strengthens quality at a fraction of the cost?

 

best,

 

-- 
Dr. Heather Morrison
Associate Professor
École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies
University of Ottawa

Desmarais 111-02

613-562-5800 ext. 7634

Sustaining the Knowledge Commons: Open Access Scholarship

http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/
http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html
heather.morri...@uottawa.ca

 

On 2017-06-27, at 11:38 AM, "Reckling, Falk" 

 wrote:





Indeed Eric, astonishingbackground story, almost all what you have to know
about the publishing industry and very well written,



Best Falk



Von: Éric Archambault
Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Juni 2017 09:26
An: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Betreff: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific
publishing bad for science?



Interesting article in the Guardian that spells out the role played by
Robert Maxwell in the development of the scholarly journal industry.

Éric


Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for
science?
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientif
ic-publishing-bad-for-science?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


Eric Archambault
1science.com
Science-Metrix.com
+1-514-495-6505 x111

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

 

 

 

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

[Peter Murray-Rust]

I'd like to publicly commend Stephen Buranyi for this article. He spent a
*lot*of time on it, and spent a whole day with me getting a historical and
current perspective. Originally I think he hoped to give pointers for the
future, but the story (rightly) mutated itself into Maxwell , which is
exactly where it should be. Not enough people realise that it was
effectively Maxwell who has corrupted the scholarly publishing system and
this is an excellent and timely reminder of the initial causes.

P.

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Donald Samulack - Editage <
donald.samul...@editage.com> wrote:

> I ask that the industry consider whether or not SciHub activities could
> possibly be the work of one individual residing in Russia, or whether there
> is something more malicious taking place instead.
>
>
>
> I am not a conspiracy theorist, but it makes sense to me (and I have not
> heard any serious argument otherwise) in light of recent Russian attempts
> to alter the course of the US election (and others), that if Russia
> *really* wanted to get into the computers of every research lab and
> academic institution around the world, there would be no better way to do
> it than to give away free research articles. Please think about this… a
> cover for a phishing exercise targeting every atomic energy facility,
> WHO-sponsored lab, CDC facilities, government and state labs around the
> world, leading academic institutions housing the world’s cutting edge
> intellectual property, etc.
>
>
>
> The computing and article collating power that this single person would
> need to have at her disposal to be able to have the IP change every 10
> minutes (as I understand it), archive and mirror the collections, etc. may
> not be the resources and activities of a single person. We need to consider
> this possibility in this new world we live in, and also consider the
> consequences of not taking steps to shut down such potentially corrupt
> intent, if in fact such intent is ongoing.
>
>
>
> Donald Samulack
>
> (Speaking as a concerned citizen)
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Heather Morrison
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 27, 2017 1:08 PM
> *To:* Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
> *Subject:* Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of
> scientific publishing bad for science?
>
>
>
> Indeed, great article. Building on this, a reflection: whatever one thinks
> of the ethics and legality of Elsevier's lawsuit against SciHub
> founder Alexandra Elbakyan, it appears to me that she has demonstrated that
> a Kazhakstani graduate student can provide the bulk of the important
> services contributed by Elsevier (hosting and serving up articles) at no
> cost to users, and apparently off the side of her desk. If this is correct,
> this says something about the real necessary marginal cost for providing
> this service, i.e. almost nothing.
>
>
>
> Considering that academics do the real work of academic publishing -
> writing and peer review - if the traditional value add of publishers in
> storing and disseminating articles, necessary in the print and early
> electronic ages, can now be done for next to nothing, surely we can devise
> a new system that retains or strengthens quality at a fraction of the cost?
>
>
>
> best,
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Heather Morrison
> Associate Professor
> École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies
> University of Ottawa
>
> Desmarais 111-02
>
> 613-562-5800 ext. 7634 <(613)%20562-5800>
>
> Sustaining the Knowledge Commons: Open Access Scholarship
>
> http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/
> http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html
> heather.morri...@uottawa.ca
>
>
>
> On 2017-06-27, at 11:38 AM, "Reckling, Falk" 
>
>  wrote:
>
>
>
> Indeed Eric, astonishingbackground story, almost all what you have to know
> about the publishing industry and very well written,
>
>
>
> Best Falk
>
>
>
> Von: Éric Archambault >
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Juni 2017 09:26
> An: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) >
> Betreff: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific
> publishing bad for science?
>
>
>
> Interesting article in the Guardian that spells out the role played by
> Robert Maxwell in the development of the scholarly journal industry.
>
> Éric
>
>
> Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for
> science?
> https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-
> scientific-publishing-bad-for-science?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
>
>
> Eric Archambault
> 1science.com
> Science-Metrix.com
> +1-514-495-6505 x111 <(514)%20495-6505>
>
> ___
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL@eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
> ___
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL@eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton

Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

[Donald Samulack - Editage]

http://www.stm-publishing.com/the-association-of-american-publishers-welcome
s-major-judgment-against-sci-hub-pirate-site/

 

On June 21st, in the case of Elsevier vs. Sci-Hub, the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled in favor of
Elsevier to the tune of $15 million.

 

This will be a game changer! Congratulations to Elsevier for stepping
forward to hold Sci-Hub accountable to sweeping copyright infringement,
hijacking of proxy credentials, and associated misconduct.

 

This puts another twist on the story which was the root of this string. Ask
yourself who else would have had the ability to stand up to such a blatantly
corrupt activity to take a stand, draw a line in the sand, and curb such
gross copyright infringement? I wonder how close Google will be looking at
this ruling? You just cannot scrub people’s intellectual property and
broadcast it, even though there is a “wanting” audience to consume it.

 

 

Donald Samulack

(Speaking as a concerned citizen)

 

 

From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf
Of Donald Samulack - Editage
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 2:12 PM
To: 'Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)'
Subject: Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific
publishing bad for science?

 

I ask that the industry consider whether or not SciHub activities could
possibly be the work of one individual residing in Russia, or whether there
is something more malicious taking place instead.

 

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but it makes sense to me (and I have not
heard any serious argument otherwise) in light of recent Russian attempts to
alter the course of the US election (and others), that if Russia really
wanted to get into the computers of every research lab and academic
institution around the world, there would be no better way to do it than to
give away free research articles. Please think about this… a cover for a
phishing exercise targeting every atomic energy facility, WHO-sponsored lab,
CDC facilities, government and state labs around the world, leading academic
institutions housing the world’s cutting edge intellectual property, etc. 

 

The computing and article collating power that this single person would need
to have at her disposal to be able to have the IP change every 10 minutes
(as I understand it), archive and mirror the collections, etc. may not be
the resources and activities of a single person. We need to consider this
possibility in this new world we live in, and also consider the consequences
of not taking steps to shut down such potentially corrupt intent, if in fact
such intent is ongoing.

 

Donald Samulack

(Speaking as a concerned citizen)

 

 

From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf
Of Heather Morrison
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 1:08 PM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: Re: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific
publishing bad for science?

 

Indeed, great article. Building on this, a reflection: whatever one thinks
of the ethics and legality of Elsevier's lawsuit against SciHub founder
Alexandra Elbakyan, it appears to me that she has demonstrated that a
Kazhakstani graduate student can provide the bulk of the important services
contributed by Elsevier (hosting and serving up articles) at no cost to
users, and apparently off the side of her desk. If this is correct, this
says something about the real necessary marginal cost for providing this
service, i.e. almost nothing.

 

Considering that academics do the real work of academic publishing - writing
and peer review - if the traditional value add of publishers in storing and
disseminating articles, necessary in the print and early electronic ages,
can now be done for next to nothing, surely we can devise a new system that
retains or strengthens quality at a fraction of the cost?

 

best,

 

-- 
Dr. Heather Morrison
Associate Professor
École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies
University of Ottawa

Desmarais 111-02

613-562-5800 ext. 7634

Sustaining the Knowledge Commons: Open Access Scholarship

http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/
http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html
heather.morri...@uottawa.ca

 

On 2017-06-27, at 11:38 AM, "Reckling, Falk" 

 wrote:

 

Indeed Eric, astonishingbackground story, almost all what you have to know
about the publishing industry and very well written,



Best Falk



Von: Éric Archambault
Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Juni 2017 09:26
An: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Betreff: [GOAL] Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific
publishing bad for science?



Interesting article in the Guardian that spells out the role played by
Robert Maxwell in the development of the scholarly journal industry.

Éric


Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for