That is what Digital Commons is for. Steve
From: "Ganter, Philip" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 11:16 AM To: Steve Young <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, ECOLOG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] let's go corporate, publishing companies have! The problem is not whether or not we are being paid. We are paid by our home institutions. The problem is the cost of getting to publications based on research funded by public money. That has been and continues to be the root problem, compounded by the publish-or-perish, paper-counting mentality and the rise of predatory “open-source” publishers. Just this week, I have visited the websites of major scientific publishers who all wanted over $35 for access to a single article. Preposterous (I am reminded at the silly prices that keep most “minibar” items firmly in the hotel room refrigerator in the US, while in South America, they are priced reasonably and actually are a convenience). But I could often “rent” temporary access for a few dollars. Hmmmmm. The major US academic funding agencies need to learn a lesson from Apple. They need to flex their power and establish an iTunes for academic publishing where a dollar gets you the publication you want. The publishers can be paid royalties from this. With a bit of quality control over which publications are part of the scheme and some peer pressure to not submit manuscripts to publishers not participating in the scheme, we can resolve many of the issues surrounding access to science (for that is what we are, ultimately, discussing). Phil Ganter Biological Sciences Tennessee State University Nashville, TN From: "Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Steve Young <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: Steve Young <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 7:57 AM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] let's go corporate, publishing companies have! And then there is the argument that some just enjoy reviewing papers – pro bono or payment is not something they consider. They like the opportunity to be involved in cutting edge science albeit the very periphery, before it is widely distributed. Interesting how this relates somewhat to the debate about paying college athletes (http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/why-ncaa-athletes-shouldnt-be-paid). Steve From: ECOLOG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of David Duffy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: David Duffy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM To: ECOLOG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] let's go corporate, publishing companies have! http://chronicle.com/article/Want-to-Change-Academic/134546?cid=trend_right_h "So why not try this: If academic work is to be commodified and turned into a source of profit for shareholders and for the 1 percent of the publishing world, then we should give up our archaic notions of unpaid craft labor and insist on professional compensation for our expertise, just as doctors, lawyers, and accountants do." -- David Duffy 戴大偉 (Dài Dàwěi) Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit/Makamakaʻāinana Botany University of Hawaii/Ke Kulanui o Hawaiʻi 3190 Maile Way Honolulu Hawaii 96822 USA 1-808-956-8218
