...Springer already operates its own [hybrid] open access option, called Springer Open Choice....Springer’s positive experience with Open Choice since 2004 seems to have been a key factor in its decision to purchase BMC. According Derk Haank, Springer’s chief executive officer, “This acquisition reinforces the fact that we see open access publishing as a sustainable part of STM publishing and not an ideological crusade.” ...
“It’s clear from Derk Haank’s statement that Springer wants BMC because it’s OA, not despite it,” read one comment on the Open Access News blog. [PS: That's me.] ...
If some elements of the conventional publishing community really have been fighting tooth and nail to overturn open access, then BMC may be forgiven for its previous uncompromising line about the benefits of OA over the conventional publishing model. But following the acquisition, Cockerill has adopted a more measured tone.
“From a commercial point of view, open access is just another business model for covering the costs of publishing research articles,” he told IWR. “Neither model is inherently more or less commercial than the other.”
Open access is a new and growing model, he continued, because it makes good use of the economics of information on the internet, where additional copies can be distributed online at negligible cost. “Open access takes advantage of that economic reality to widen the dissemination of research results,” Cockerill added.
As an autonomous operating unit within Springer, BMC will continue to set its own article processing charges, and has made clear that there are no plans to raise charges as a result of the acquisition. Nor, according to Cockerill, is there any likelihood of BMC merging with Springer Open Choice and one of the brands being lost as a result.
Reductions in BMC staff numbers are not on the cards, either, Cockerill confirmed. In fact, the company is actively hiring additional staff, and the two businesses see opportunities to make use of Springer’s global infrastructure and resources to extend BMC’s service to more authors across an increasing range of disciplines....
“Journals in niche areas that are loss-making under the traditional model may be profitable under an open access model, and an increasing number of traditional journals are now switching to open access with BioMed Central,” Cockerill said....
“It does seem to legitimise the OA publishing model,” said Frank Norman of the National Institute for Medical Research. “As the first wholly OA publisher, BMC came in for a lot of criticism from traditional publishers in its early years. Seeing it incorporated into a mainstream publisher makes it harder to claim that OA journals are antithetical to successful publishing....”
Posted by
Peter Suber at 12/03/2008 02:57:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
