Re: Draft Policy for Self-Archiving University Research Output

From: Mark Doyle <doyle_at_APS.ORG>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 10:36:39 -0500

On Thursday, January 9, 2003, at 10:39 PM, Steve Hitchcock wrote:

> Certainly institutions must do more than Mark Doyle
> wants, despite the good work APS is doing, which is for publishers to
> 'grant back to authors all of the rights they expect'. On this issue,
> institutions must lead, not follow.

Hmm, I not sure what you think I "want." So let me clarify. I want
institutions
to recognize that scholarly communication is a shared responsibility
among authors, their institutions, grant providers, peer-reviewers, and
archivers (the latter role is provided by "publishers" today, but that
doesn't
have to be the case). I want institutions to recognize the costs in
carrying
out peer-review and in creating high quality archives and I want them
to be
willing to pay for those costs (that is, I want them to be willing to
pay for such
things up front so that a subscription model is no longer needed to
cover these
costs). And I want them to become (paying) partners in providing
redundancy in
archiving and distribution of peer-reviewed material. In my view, any
institution
that is willing to pay the costs associated with the publication of the
an
article up front should have the right to distribute the formatted
article and make
it freely available as well as incorporate any archival version (say an
XML file)
into their institutional repository. The problem is mostly one of
transition though - enough institutions would need to move to such a
model at one time to ensure
that APS is able to mitigate the financial risk that would come with
undermining
the subscription model in a piecemeal way.

Cheers,
Mark

Mark Doyle
Manager, Product Development
The American Physical Society
doyle_at_aps.org
Received on Fri Jan 10 2003 - 15:36:39 GMT