Consumer Rip-Offs versus Author Give-Aways
Stevan harnad
In the Montreal Gazette today, William Watson (Economics, McGill
University) http://www.mcgill.ca/economics/faculty/watson/
unearthed this old chestnut again:
> [Providing and Using self-archived articles is l
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Charles W. Bailey, Jr. wrote:
> DSpace has a broader scope than just eprints; however
> some cost data is available...
>
> Barton, Mary R., and Julie Harford Walker. "Building a
> Business Plan for DSpace, MIT Libraries' Digital Institutional
> Repository" Journal of Digita
DSpace has a broader scope than just eprints; however,
some cost data is available in the two documents I described
below (from Current Cites volume 14, no. 12,
December 2003):
Barton, Mary R., and Julie Harford Walker. "[29]Building a
Business Plan for DSpace, MIT Libraries' Digital Institution
This scriptural exegesis about "free" vs. "open" calls to mind
the (alleged) words of a certain franco-austrian monarchess on the
subject of brioche:
"Let Them Eat Cake..." (M. Antoinette)
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/1525.html
What research needs is toll-free access
>
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Stevan Harnad wrote:
>
> There is nothing in the BOAI definition to support the "free/open"
> distinction that some have since attempted to make. In particular, the
> BOAI definition states that author/institution self-archiving of the
> full-text of an article is one of the
This topic thread:
"EPrints, DSpace or ESpace?"
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2670.html
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2837.html
Peter Suber reported the following in Open Access News
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2004_01_11_fosblogarchive
But surely we don't want to settle for anything less than 100%! And
what about those who are not served by the research libraries, wouldn't
it be wonderful if they could get access as well?
'Enlightened licensing' may put us in a better position than we were in
before, but it is still sub-optimal
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Sally Morris wrote:
> I think the CILIP response ignores the fact that new licensing arrangements
> from publishers have actually significantly increased the percentage of
> available literature which library patrons can now access. I'm not saying
> it's anything like 100 per
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Jan Velterop wrote:
> As a movement, open access could do worse than follow Stevan's strategy:
> publish in an open access journal when you can; if there is no open access
> journal for you, publish where you can and self-archive.
Amen!
"that is all Ye know on earth, and
