Heather Morrison wrote:
> If I understand correctly, authors will still need to self-archive
> their own final copy with Open Choice. This being the case - and there
> being no difference in access - why would authors not save some money,
> and simply self-archive?...
No, this is incorrect. For authors who elect to pay for Open Choice, Springer
archives the official published version of their article for them, in
the Open Access sector of its own Archive, making the article OA webwide via
SpringerLink, the publisher's online service.
> ...a policy that asks authors to pay to give the entire world free access,
> yet denies authors the right to deposit a copy in the repository of
> their choice, is a tad absurd, isn't it?
Springer does not deny authors the right to self-archive their own final
drafts, whether or not they opt for Open Choice. Springer journals are
among the over 90% of journals that have a "green" self-archiving policy.
http://romeo.eprints.org/search.php?t=springer
Open Choice is exactly what it says it is: a choice, i.e., an extra option.
All Springer authors can choose to self-archive their final drafts without
choosing to pay for Open Choice.
Stevan Harnad
Received on Tue Aug 16 2005 - 19:25:53 BST