---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 13:34:15 -0400 From: eamon t fennessy <efennessy@ATT.NET> Subject: Re: Free Online Access After One Year? (Stevan Harnad) Let me get this straight...Professor Harnard writes, 'why on earth should there be a one-year embargo, restricting access to accepted, refereed research only to those who can and will pay? What advantage does the author-researcher, and research itself, derive from an arrangement like that, now that it is no longer necessary?" This may make no sense to some, but let's review the decisions the author-researcher has to make in order to be published and to obtain stature in his community. First, he/she can transfer copyright and perhaps be published in a reputable journal. This achieves publication and visibility among colleagues. Or...a researcher could settle for publication in a lesser journal and at the same time retain copyright, post the research on an electronic bulletin board and allow unlimited access, not after a year, but anytime the author-researcher prefers. These decisions are up to the researcher. RESEARCHERS RESEARCH. PUBLISHERS PUBLISH. Researchers receive acclaim. Publishers are able to finance their roles in the communications chain. PROFESSORS TEACH...but not for free. What is there about commerce that makes some feel researcher's research should be free? Eamon T. Fennessy The Copyright Group P.O. Box 5496 Beverly Farms, MA 01915 Phone & FAX (978) 927 9936 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Marcia Tuttle <tuttle@email.unc.edu> To: <SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU> Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 9:27 AM Subject: Re: Free Online Access After One Year? (Stevan Harnad) > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 10:44:02 +0100 > From: Stevan Harnad <harnad@COGLIT.ECS.SOTON.AC.UK> > Subject: Re: Free Online Access After One Year? > > On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Richard Gordon wrote: > > > I understand your arguments on making online access to the scientific > > literature free. However, I'd like to suggest a compromise, which > > some publishers might be willing to implement right away: > > > > All online journal articles will become accessible for free at a > > fixed interval after publication. > > > > A reasonable interval might be one year. Few sales of printed > > journals occur after a year, so only those people needing rapid > > access (and not willing to do the work of writing for reprints or > > accessing preprint depositories) would pay. > > I'm not sure in what sense you suggest this as a compromise. If what > you mean is that it would be very helpful if journal publishers freed > their contents on their own websites a year after publication, then of > course it certainly would be very helpful (and indeed a number of > journal publishers are contemplating doing so already, and even > earlier). > > But if what you mean is that authors should not self-archive their own > refereed postprints as soon as they are final, but instead wait until > the publishers themselves elect to archive them earlier, I think that > would be a very bad (and unnecessary) compromise indeed. > > The whole point of the self-archiving initiative is to put an end to > the needless and counterproductive access-barriers (hence > impact-barriers) for these give-away refereed research reports. Why on > earth should there be a one-year embargo, restricting access to > accepted, refereed research only to those who can and will pay? What > advantage does the author-researcher, and research itself, derive from > an arrangement like that, now that it is no longer necessary? > > No, let authors self-archive their pre-refereeing preprints in > interoperable eprint archives (http://www.eprints.org), and as soon > as they are ready, let them also self-archive their refereed postprints > (or append the "corrigenda file" to the preprint, if the > Harnad/Oppenheim strategy needs to be used to get around restrictive > copyright agreements). > > The objective of freeing the refereed research literature online for > everyone, everywhere, forever, immediately, is attained by doing the > above. > > For those who are not content with just the self-archived "vanilla" > version of the refereed report, and are willing and able to pay (or > wait) for the publisher's "deluxe" version, let that be available as an > OPTION for as long as there is a market for it (whether it is a year > from publication or even longer). > > But certainly no "compromise" should be considered that entails > continuing to needlessly holding the refereed reports hostage to the > deluxe add-ons and their tolls -- not even for a minute. (The immediate > availability of their refereed research is as important to researchers > as the immediate availability of their funds is to investors: an > "embargo" of even a day amounts to a pure, and gratuitous, loss.) > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Stevan Harnad harnad@cogsci.soton.ac.uk > Professor of Cognitive Science harnad@princeton.edu > Department of Electronics and phone: +44 23-80 592-582 > Computer Science fax: +44 23-80 592-865 > University of Southampton http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/ > Highfield, Southampton http://www.princeton.edu/~harnad/ > SO17 1BJ UNITED KINGDOM > > NOTE: A complete archive of this ongoing discussion of providing free > access to the refereed journal literature is available at the American > Scientist September Forum (98 & 99 & 00): > > http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/september98-forum.html > > You may join the list at the site above. > > Discussion can be posted to: > > september98-forum@amsci-forum.amsci.org >
