> If you compare Springer and Blackwell on the one hand, to BioMed
> Central and PLoS on the other hand, it seems clear that authors retain
> more of their rights with the PLoS/BioMed Central model, no?
That may be true, but I'm not sure -- in response to my query on this
topic on the LIBLICENSE listserv, a Blackwell representative said that
for Online Open articles, the author (or original copyright holder,
which might be an institution) retains copyright. I haven't done an
exhaustive comparison of the agreements to verify that.
Even if it's true, though, it's irrelevant to my point, which is that
copyright has little to do with any meaningful definition of open
access. What matters is whether the general public can read the article
freely -- not (pax the framers of the Berlin, Barcelona and Bethesda
protocols) whether the general public also acquires what have
traditionally been the copyright holder's exclusive rights.
----
Rick Anderson
Dir. of Resource Acquisition
University of Nevada, Reno Libraries
(775) 784-6500 x273
rickand_at_unr.edu
Received on Tue Mar 08 2005 - 00:08:29 GMT