Library Licensing Strategies
Libraries are accelerating engagement with transformative and pure publish agreements, balancing contract-based publishing support with an APC fund, and investing in the scholarly communications ecosystem.
Showing results for open access
Libraries are accelerating engagement with transformative and pure publish agreements, balancing contract-based publishing support with an APC fund, and investing in the scholarly communications ecosystem.
A new report for the Center of Economic Development suffers from a strong bias in its authorship. But beyond that, its implicit complaints, if addressed completely, would lead to a trainwreck in the world of scholarly communication. Is nobody thinking these things through?
Another petition is brewing, but perhaps we should aim higher than accessibility and upwards to true intellectual access. To do this, it takes a lot of work, care, and thought. It is not a simple matter at all.
Fifteen years after the term was coined, we still don’t have a single agreed-upon definition of Open Access (OA). What are the implications of this diversity of views within the OA movement, and how much does it really matter?
Scholarly publishers are already doing much to make government funded research as free as possible as soon as it is published. Why do we need a law to enact what is already taking shape? Robert Harington suggests it comes down to politics.
An interview with MDPI’s CEO, Dr. Franck Vazquez, sheds light on the challenges and innovations during the last 20 years of open-access publishing.
Last week’s STM news raises questions about whether scholarly publishers are prepared to radically improve content distribution. Is content syndication the end game?
Freely-accessible articles are cited more frequently, but open access is not the cause, a new study reports.
Ithaka S+R has published a report on libraries and open access. Libraries are still important in the lives of scholars, but the trends are not in their favor. Open access doesn’t seem to be meeting scholars’ needs.
“How Open Is It?” offers a useful set of parameters for defining “open,” but some fundamental questions remain, including the commercial and social consequences of free distribution.
A long, thoughtful essay by a UK academic contemplating open access merits attention, for obvious and subtle reasons.
As we consider the future of scholarly publishing generally and of open access in particular, we need to keep in mind the deep differences between the humanities and the applied sciences when it comes to both the production and the consumption of scholarship–and the implications of those differences for new dissemination models.
As digital piracy goes large scale, publishers, libraries, and the open access movement have a lot at stake.
Judy Luther and Todd Carpenter look at the technological challenges of providing access to content in an increasingly dispersed and mobile world.
The Journal of Open Source Software was designed from scratch using the principles of open source and software design practices. This has both advantages and disadvantages, particularly with respect to elements of the traditional scholarly publishing ecosystem.