I covered this topic in an essay a few years ago, "The
Devil You Don't
Know," published in FirstMonday:
<http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_8/esp
osito/index.html>
FirstMonday is an OA publication, BTW, which is my preferred
venue. I have been insisting all along that I am an OA
advocate.
Note that in the "Devil" essay, I outlined a plan
for an
economically sustainable form of OA. The very same plan is
now
being rolled out in PLoS's latest offering. I have tried to
put
OA into a broader context of scholarly communications in a
forthcoming issue of The Journal of Electronic Publishing in
an
article entitled "The Wisdom of Oz" (Jan. '07, I
believe). I am
sorry to burden readers of this list with citations to my
own
writings, but I cannot let stand the implication that I am
somehow dodging the hard questions.
Joe Esposito
On 10/27/06, David Prosser <david.prosser bodley.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> Joe
>
> I note that you have picked on my facetious opening so
as to
> avoid the main point. What is the mechanism under
which a move
> to open access will cause a flood of new papers so
leading to
> greatly increased costs? You tell us that ' Open
Access will
> significantly increase the cost of scholarly
communications by
> creating incentives for production.' I've explained why
I think
> there will not be significant new incentives to
publish, could
> you explain why you think there will be?
>
> Best wishes
>
> David C Prosser PhD
> Director
> SPARC Europe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:owner-liblicense-llists.yale.edu] On Behalf
Of Joseph J. Esposito
> Sent: 27 October 2006 01:40
> To: liblicense-llists.yale.edu
> Subject: Fair's fair
>
> David Prosser said:
>
> "It is always fun to see what new evils open
access will be
> responsible for - today it is the possible bankrupting
of the US.
> I'm sure famine and pestilence will not be far
behind."
>
> I would be interested to know how much library
expenditures have
> declined since the advent of the Open Access movement.
>
> Joe Esposito
|