Thanks to Xenia van Edig (of Copernicus) and Dirk Pieper for providing new
substantive evidence. Following are highlights of my update. New blog post
title: Copernicus 2015-2016 comparison
Update July 6, 2016:
I retract my statement on tripling of page charges thanks to new evidence
Thanks for the clarification Xenia.
We all agree it's important to keep an eye on the pricing of scholarly
communications but Copernicus are the clearly the wrong 'target' here.
Let's not make good and fair publishers our 'enemies'!
On 6 July 2016 at 08:59, Xenia van Edig
Dear all,
just a short link to the Open APC initiative, which collects within the
framework of the INTACT project APC cost information from 35 institutions.
The visualistaion of the data stored on GitHub allows a view also on
publishers. For Copernicus it looks like this:
Dear Heather,
It is good to see that pricing of OA publishers is closely monitored and
observed. In our case, however, your accusations are incorrect. We have not
doubled or even tripled the article processing charges as you have stated in
your email and your blog post.
To understand the
