Please do not misinterpret what I was trying to say. I am not against the
concept of open access publishing in favor of subscription based
approaches.
What I am saying is that whenever I try to think through a business model
that provides for Eileen's five independent organizations or institutions
having adequate long-term funding for archiving, I end up coming back to
some mechanism that would have them receiving funds in exchange for
providing access to their archived materials. It is hard to see how to
make this work, however, in an environment in which open access publishing
prevails.
I realize it may be hard to read this and not interpret it as an argument
against open access, but that is not my intent. What I am saying is that
open access makes Eileen's already difficult requirements for an archive
solution even harder to achieve. It is going to take some very creative
thinking to move us toward the twin goals of open access and a stable
long-term archive. (Rather than "twin" goals perhaps I should say
"married" goals, because they were not born together but we must, I think,
bring them to a compatible union.)
Keith Seitter
Deputy Executive Director
American Meteorological Society