There seems to be some misunderstanding of publisher positions
on open access. Many publishers are trying, even embracing real
open access options for authors within the environment of high
quality, highly read journals. For example, we at the American
Institute of Physics offer Author Select, an open access option,
for all our journals. We even lowered fees last this year
crossing below the raised fees of some ardent OA advocates.
The real issue is whether governments should create unfunded
mandates that force business models such as 6 or 12 month limits
on those who have a different publishing model.
Let the market, not the government, decide what authors and
readers want and need. Once the government decides, if things do
not work out, we are really stuck.
Marc
Heather Morrison <heatherm@eln.bc.ca> 1/25/2007 7:17 PM >>>
There are some in the publishing community who are spending
significant sums fighting open access - for example, Nature
recently reported that AAP spent $300,000 - $500,000 in 2006, as
reported in their article, PR's "pitbull" takes on open access -
January 25, 2007.
Funds that are currently being spent fighting open access are
funds that are not really needed for publishing per se, and so it
is reasonable to ask, what might be accomplished if funds were
redirected from fighting open access, to implementing OA?
[SNIP]
Heather G. Morrison