Eric Merkel-Sobotta, Elsevier and open access, Neuroinformatics, 3, 1 (2005) pp. 5-10. Only this abstract is free online, at least so far: 'Before we get into the details of open access, what it means, and where Elsevier stands, we should look at what scientific, technical, and medical (STM) publishing actually is. During the past year, when speaking to journalists and government representatives in many countries, it has become evident that we have, as an industry, not successfully (or succinctly) explained what it is that we actually do. As a relative newcomer to STM publishing, I can safely say that it is not an industry where the KISS principle ("Keep it simple, Stupid") is widely embraced. And although what we do is definitely not self-evident from what we produce, we should spend more time coming up with better ways of explaining it. Ignorance and complication leads to misunderstanding, and that is something we don't need right now. There have been accusations by proponents of alternative publishing models that traditional STM publishers don't add any value. Collette Bean of Wiley has a good answer to this one: "If this is true, I've been very busy adding no value...." Of course we add value we've been doing so for more than 300 yr.'
(PS: For my quick response, see SOAN for 5/2/05: 'If you tuned in late, I acknowledge that journals add value. It's a myth that OA wants to dispense with these valuable services, although sometimes OA journals must choose between the more essential and the less essential services. The true bone of contention is not whether these services are valuable but how to pay for the most essential services without creating access barriers for readers.' This has been my consistent position for years. See SOAN for 9/4/03: '[P]ublishers often overlook the fact that open-access proponents agree with them [that journals add value]. Open-access proponents might even concede that journals add value in every way that publishers say they do. However, open-access proponents tend to argue that some of these journal services are more essential than others, even if all are valuable, that they cost less than most journals charge for them, that it's better to cover the costs of the essential services from the author's end of the transaction than the reader's end, and therefore that they do not justify access barriers.')
Posted by
Peter Suber at 5/18/2005 12:58:00 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.
