Revisiting — The Tyranny of Unintended Consequences: Richard Poynder on Open Access and the Open Access Movement
Looking back at Richard Poynder’s in-depth analysis of the state of open access. What’s changed since then?
Looking back at Richard Poynder’s in-depth analysis of the state of open access. What’s changed since then?
Erich van Rijn looks at the University of California’s Luminos open access books program and reviews lessons learned and what is needed for such programs to succeed.
Several of the foremost enterprises in open source recently joined forces with a group of universities that direct funding to support open source, to call for greater resources to be invested in support. This Invest in Open Infrastructure initiative, though nascent, may be the best hope to date of some kind of common collective action in support of open infrastructure. Today, we interview one of its leaders, Dan Whaley.
Proposing a model for thinking about the interactions of rigor, cogency, accessibility, significance, openness, and impact in scholarly quality.
Robert Harington interviews a number of experts with a few burning questions on the Subscribe to Open (S2O) model in a two part post, part one appearing here:
New models are emerging for funding open access, which may serve to alleviate one of the publishing industry’s most problematic practices: Levying book processing charges on authors.
Alison Muddit interviews Goeffrey Crossick about his report on the future of open access monographs.
A recent opinion paper by Richard Poynder @rickypo offers analysis and prognostication with regard to the current state and future prospects of #openaccess and the open access movement.
What has not made headlines but is also a noteworthy outcome of transformative agreements is the significant increase in access and readership for paywalled articles that they facilitate.
Experimentation is key in supporting open access monographs. We’ve done the research and now it’s time to build a better user experience.
An interview with the President of the Council of Scientific Society Presidents, on the unintended and potentially damaging consequences of public and open access mandates and embargoes.
Some were surprised GetFTR wasn’t immediately welcomed by the library community. @lisalibrarian analyzes why.
Pure publish contracts are possible now. It is not necessary to wait for the subscription publishers to change their business model or to pair a pure publish component with a read and publish component in a transformative agreement. @lisalibrarian
Robert Harington reports on the recent SSP Publisher-Funder Task Force closed forum of funders, publishers, librarians and academics, who met to discuss how collaboration among stakeholder groups may accelerate a transition to open research.
Is there demand for open access journals in the social sciences and humanities? Or does Sage see opportunities in unspent equity funds?