Elsevier Study Commissioned by UK BIS

David Wojick dwojick at CRAIGELLACHIE.US
Sat Dec 7 12:12:01 EST 2013

In case some of you have not seen it, the draft FIRST bill in the US House 
has a major Federal OA section beginning on page 32 (section 302).


In particular it provides for embargo periods of up to 24 months, rather 
than OSTP's baseline of 12 months. Agencies can also go for 30 or 36 months 
for specific cases that must be justified. As a policy analyst I would say 
there is no way to tell where OA is going at this point. The wheel of 
fortune is still spinning, as it were.


At 11:35 AM 12/7/2013, you wrote:
>Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): 
>As you say, this is indeed specualation. I can follow the reasoning but 
>wonder if you could mention examples of publishers releasing content after 
>one year as you say under 6.
>The roadmap you put before us here is a major turn from the massive 
>introduction of hybrid gold now offered by publishers and accepted by 
>governments (UK, NL).
>I am afraid that currently many authors and universities would be content 
>with (one eyear) delayed gold OA and retaining subscriptions. I do not 
>think that under those circumstances there would still be massive support 
>for depositing author versions for just one year. We do not even have that 
>now, with almost no delayed gold at all.
>It may be tactically important to convince the research community of green 
>ID/OA mandates before publishers make this switch.
>One final suggestion: it would be nice to have your specualative roadmap 
>and the OA classification you suggest in this thread available on the 
><http://eprints.org>eprints.org webpage, for easy reference.
>Op 7 dec. 2013 om 13:56 heeft "Stevan Harnad" 
><<mailto:amsciforum at GMAIL.COM>amsciforum at GMAIL.COM> het volgende geschreven:
>>Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe): 
>>On 2013-12-07, at 6:31 AM, "Bosman, J.M." 
>><<mailto:j.bosman at UU.NL>j.bosman at UU.NL> wrote:
>>>Could you elaborate on your expectation that "It is almost certain that 
>>>within the next few years most journals will become Gold DA (with an 
>>>embargo of 12 months)". Do you already see publishers move in that 
>>>direction or are there other reasons for your forecast?
>>It is an extrapolation and inference from the manifest pattern across the 
>>last half-decade:
>>1. Publishers know (better than anyone) that OA is inevitable and 
>>unstoppable, only delayable (via embargoes).
>>2. Publishers also know that it is the first year of sales that sustains 
>>their subscriptions. (The talk about later sales is just hyperbole.)
>>3. Publishers have been fighting tooth and nail against Green OA 
>>mandates, both via lobbying and via embargoes.
>>4. The majority of publishers with Green OA embargoes have an embargo of 
>>one year (though 60%, including Elsevier and Springer, have no embargo at all).
>>5. This 1-year Green OA embargo is publishers' realistic compromise: with 
>>minimal loss, it wards off immediate Green OA, making Green mandates 
>>Delayed Green Mandates instead of Green OA Mandates.
>>6. Then as an added protection against losing control of their content, 
>>more and more publishers are releasing it after a year on their own 
>>proprietary websites after a year: Delayed Gold
>>The reasoning is that since free access after a year is a foregone 
>>conclusion, because of Green mandates, it's better if that free access is 
>>provided by publishers as Gold, so it all remains in their hands 
>>(navigation, search, reference linking, re-use, re-publication, etc.). 
>>1-year Gold also protects the version of record from being replaced by 
>>the Green author's version. (Publishers even have a faint hope that 
>>1-year Gold might take the wind out of the sails of Green mandates and 
>>the clamor for OA altogether: Everyone gets Gold access after a year, and 
>>that's the end of it. Back to business as before -- unless the market 
>>prefers to pay the same price that it pays for subscriptions, in exchange 
>>for immediate, un-embargoed Gold OA (as in SCOAP3 or hybrid Gold).
>>But I think most publishers know that that is a pipe-dream, and that all 
>>they are really doing is holding back the inevitable for as long as they 
>>possibly can:
>>And the inevitable is immediate Green OA, with authors posting their 
>>refereed, accepted final drafts immediately upon acceptance for 
>>publication. That version will become the version of record, because 
>>subscriptions to the publisher's print and online version will become 
>>unsustainable once the Green OA version is free for all.
>>Under cancellation pressure induced by immediate Green, publishers will 
>>have to cut inessential costs by dropping the print and online version of 
>>record, offloading all access-provision and archiving onto the global 
>>network of Green OA institutional repositories, downsizing to the 
>>provision of the peer review service alone, paid for, per paper, per 
>>round of peer review, as Fair Gold (instead of today's over-priced, 
>>double-paid and double-dipped Fool's Gold) out of a fraction of the 
>>institutional annual windfall savings from their cancelled annual 
>>So both the 1-year embargo on Green and the 1-year release of Gold are 
>>attempts to fend off the above: OA has become a fight for that first year 
>>of access: researchers need and want it immediately; publishers want to 
>>hold onto it unless they continue to be paid as much as they are being 
>>paid now.
>>But there is an antidote for publisher embargoes on immediate Green, and 
>>that is the immediate-institutional-deposit mandate plus the copy-Request 
>>Button (the HEFCE/Liege model mandate), designating the deposit of the 
>>final refereed draft immediately upon acceptance for publication as the 
>>sole mechanism for submitting publications for institutional performance 
>>review and for compliance with funding conditions. Once those mandates 
>>are universally adopted, universal OA will only be one keystroke away: 
>>The keystroke that makes an embargoed deposit OA. And embargoes will very 
>>quickly die their inevitable and well-deserved deaths under the mounting 
>>global pressure for immediate OA (which will merely be enhanced by 
>>Button-based Almost-OA).
>>There you have it: Speculation, but grounded in the pragmatics, logic and 
>>evidence of what it actually going on today.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20131207/0f062cb6/attachment.html>

More information about the SIGMETRICS mailing list