A recent statement by the American Historical Association is generating heated debate about the rights and best interests of junior scholars, the market dynamics for scholarly monographs, and the competing needs of publishers, libraries, authors, and readers.
A rare glimpse at a long-running experiment.
A response to Joe Esposito’s post last week about partnerships between libraries and university presses.
The US Department of Energy (DOE) has developed a prototype public access system that is designed to go to publisher’s websites.
Google wins an appeal on class status for the Authors Guild lawsuit. This decision may have far-reaching effects on the case and fair use principles.
An expert on the semantic Web, structured markup, and the emerging area of research data services talks about the current state of play.
SIPX aims to simplify digital rights management for end users – faculty and students – while at the same time making life easier for the publishers and purchasers of the content
eLife, BioMed Central (BMC), the Public Library of Science (PLoS), and the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) will be forming a new peer review consortium based around the concept of what eLife calls “portable peer review.”
An interview with MIke Rossner, former Director of Rockefeller University Press.
This article is about my research into the structure of what we say when we write or speak, and the logical form that underlies the discussion of complex issues.
The marginal cost of content may not always be zero as changes in telecommunications strategy and practices affect the cost of bandwidth for producers. Publishing services based on free content may be challenged by this.
There is much talk in publishing circles about disruption. What we are actually seeing unfold in our industry is not disruption, but innovation and evolution — or rather, adaption to the new normal.
An advocate for alternative metrics for article impact takes stock of where they are now, and where they’re going.
The question addressed here is not whether we in the academy should “take back publishing” from the commercial scholarly publishers, but rather what the options for doing so might be, and whether any of those options seems feasible at the moment.
Three academic groups have jointly floated a draft proposal in response to the US Government’s OSTP Public Access mandate memo.