RE: NFP publishing

[JOHANNES VELTEROP <velteropvonleyden@btinternet.com>]

David Prosser says "...versions of papers may exist in other 
repositories, but publishers add unique value do they not? 
Surely, if that value is valuable readers will come to 
publishers' sites and if the readers match the profile demanded 
by potential advertisers then those advertisers will advertise."

I'm afraid this may indicate a rather fundamental 
misunderstanding of what the added value of a publisher actually 
is. Sure, there is often some functionality benefit if one goes 
to the publisher's site instead of to a repository, but that's 
only a small part of the added value. The real value lies in all 
the processes that make an article from an informal piece of work 
(which can of course easily be communicated with complete OA 
without even involving publishers or journals) into an official, 
formal publication. That added value of formalising which was in 
essence 'grey' literature before, is a value that is condensed 
into the metadata (journal title, unique reference, etc) of a 
published article, and that metadata accompanies the article when 
it is deposited in a repository and is thus not exclusive to a 
publisher's site.

This self-archiving is allowed by many publishers, knowing - or 
counting on, in any event - the usually chaotic and anarchic 
nature of the academic community. When, or if, widespread 
repository depositing starts to undermine publishers' 
possibilities to financially support their journal operations, 
they are likely to review the policy of allowing it. They would 
be obliged to do that, of course, for the sake of all their 
stakeholders, such as their personnel, members (society 
publishers), and yes, their share-holders. (The latter, of 
course, do include funding agencies who rely on a well-performing 
share portfolio to sustain their grant-giving levels and also 
pensionfunds, which many in the academic community will want to 
draw on in old age.)

The picture is a bit more complicated and intertwined than David 
seems to make out. An 'author-side' paid open access publishing 
model may be a good way to 'save the goat and the cabbage' and 
sustain journals whilst making repository deposits entirely 
compatible with formal publishing.

Jan Velterop