linking back to brembs.net






My lab:
lab.png
Welcome Guest
Username:

Password:


Remember me

[ ]
 Currently Online (30)
 Extra Information
MicroBlog
You must be logged in to post comments on this site - please either log in or if you are not registered click here to signup

[23 Dec 12: 13:20]
Inbox zero! I don't even remember the last time I could say that!

[06 Aug 12: 14:21]
Phew! Done with nine 20min oral exams, three more to go. To be continued tomorrow...

[14 Oct 11: 11:45]
Just received an email from a computer science student - with an AOL email address?

[03 Jul 11: 22:26]
Google citation alerts suck: I just found out by accident I rolled over h-index of 13 and 500 citations http://blogarchive.brembs.net/citations.php

[21 May 11: 18:14]
6.15pm: Does god have Alzheimer? No #rapture in Europe...

[01 May 11: 11:31]
w00t! Just been invited to present at OKCon 2011! #OKCon2011


Networking

Subscribe to me on FriendFeed
Follow brembs on Twitter

Research papers by Björn Brembs
View Bjoern Brembs

Science Blog Directory
Random Video
SciSites

Everyone is shouting it from the rooftops already: Elsevier has dropped its support for the Research Works Act. As mentioned before, to me, this doesn't change my stance towards corporate publishers one bit. As John Baez said in his comment to Timothy Gowers' G+ post:
For companies like Elsevier, the great thing about bills like the Research Work Act is that they make us work hard just to keep the status quo, instead of what we really want: changing the status quo.
The approx. US$40k Elsevier spent on Reps. Issa and Maloney were dollars once set aside by an institution to pay for access to scholarly works. With more than a billion US$ in profit per year, in the two months that Open Access advocates have been busy defending Open Access, Elsevier has made just about 165 million in profits. With that return on investment, Elsevier can go on forever without any credible threat to their bottom line.

What needs to happen is that scholars need to go into the offensive rather than merely reacting to publishers' moves. Supporting the FRPAA is one intermediary step in this direction, but more needs to follow. This may be in the form of an initiative to move all our scholarly communication over to libraries or some other action aiming at bringing our works back under our control. Whatever it is, if we want to move towards greater functionality in scholarly publishing, we need to attack the bottom line of the corporations or the only thing we'll see are the kinds of token efforts we can see in the Elsevier press release.

Because of the emotionality to be seen everywhere, I'm cautiously optimistic that the RWA incident may have served as a rallying cry or galvanization point for such movements, but I'm not holding my breath. An industry with around 4 billion US$ practically burning a hole in their pockets has a lot to lose and plenty of resources to prevent any such loss.

Therefore, it is important to keep the pressure on right now and to remember that we, the public institutions, hold the purse-strings to the corporate profits. We decide directly about the money that will be used against us. Stop subscribing to journals from corporate publishers and use the saved funds to create something better that is under our own control and therefore directly benefits the taxpayer.
Posted on Monday 27 February 2012 - 17:25:42 comment: 0
Elsevier   publishing   rwa   


You must be logged in to make comments on this site - please log in, or if you are not registered click here to signup
Render time: 5.5633 sec, 0.0175 of that for queries.