Do you know what is meant by the term “transformative agreement” or how “Read and Publish” deals are structured? Today we revisit the 2019 primer by @lisalibrarian explaining the basics concepts behind these increasingly important approaches.
As we sign off for 2019, a look back at the year in The Scholarly Kitchen.
Geowalling open content is proposed yet again. As a thought experiment, @lisalibrarian explores what Plan S principles would be compromised by this tactic.
Bringing the authority of the academy to a broad audience should be second only to original research itself, especially if the research community hopes to retain or even increase the public’s support for the esoteric work that goes on behind the laboratory walls.
The creator of an emoji translation of “Moby Dick” takes a look at the linguistic role that they serve.
So does Sci-Hub lead libraries to cancel journals, or doesn’t it? Maybe the answer isn’t a simple yes or no.
Shaun Khoo questions whether authors will exercise their market power to put downward pressure on article processing charges.
Roy Kaufman of Copyright Clearance Center lays out an argument for a more robust and expansive use of licenses by rightsholders, especially in light of recent developments in the EU.
For “University Publishing” to succeed by any measure, however, it is going to have to attract a lot of authors.
Read-and-publish? Publish-and-read? A primer on transformative agreements by @lisalibrarian.
Transcript of a debate held at the 2019 Researcher to Reader Conference, on the resolution “Sci-Hub Does More Good Than Harm to Scholarly Communication.”
Guest author Rob Schlesinger encourages a rethink of the common requirement that graduate students publish their dissertations.
This year’s ER&L conference was abuzz with the threats and solutions for digital access in libraries.
Last week, the University of California terminated its license with Elsevier. Today, Roger Schonfeld argues that leakage has reduced the value of the big deal — and publisher pricing power — while empowering library negotiators.
The editorial board for the Journal of Informetrics declared checkmate when they resigned over Elsevier’s open access and open citations policies. Raising both practical and moral questions of journal ownership, the editors of Learning Publishing ask: What can this power move tell us about editorial ownership in the age of open science?