Budapest Open Access Initiative      

Budapest Open Access Initiative: BOAI Forum Archive

[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [options] [help]

boaiforum messages

[BOAI] Re: CHORUS is a Trojan Horse

From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum AT gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 20:15:15 -0400


Threading:      • This Message
             [BOAI] Re: CHORUS is a Trojan Horse from amsciforum AT gmail.com

--001a11c21edac48e7b04fdf3f3a5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Jul 11, 2014, at 6:34 AM, Stevan Harnad wrote:

*SH: *CHORUS
<http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/07/09/implementing-chorus-big-deci=
sions-loom-for-publishers/>
is
a Trojan Horse, designed so that publishers retain control over the timing,
terms and territory of any transition to Open Access.  Think about it.
http://j.mp/TrojanHorseChorus


David Wojick
<http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/07/09/implementing-chorus-big-deci=
sions-loom-for-publishers/#comment-141773>
replied
(in the SSP Scholarly Kitchen):

*DW:* Nonsense! It is the Feds that are asserting control via the US Public
Access program.  CHORUS is an attempt to minimize the damage that more
Federal repositories like PMC will cause. CHORUS will improve scientific
communication while reducing
Federal expenses. It is an elegant solution to a difficult problem.


*SH:* The Feds are (rightly) asserting control over the research output
that the public funds by mandating public access to it. Doesn=E2=80=99t sou=
nd like
nonsense to me. (Some) publishers are trying to slow the provision of
public access to publicly funded research (by embargoing it) and are
angling to remain the ones who provide the access, so that they retain
control and proprietorship over both the research output and the provision
of access to it. That doesn=E2=80=99t sound like nonsense to me either =E2=
=80=94 just
self-interest in a profound conflict of interest
between those who fund, conduct and provide the research output (the Feds,
the public, and researchers) on the one hand, and those who manage the peer
review of that research output (publishers). The peers (researchers) review
for free. It is not nonsense to attempt to hold onto a cushy deal
by =E2=80=9Cminimizing the damage=E2=80=9D for as long as possible to the i=
nflated income
streams  to which they have long grown accustomed. The Feds, the public,
and researchers can only hope  that this damage-limitation attempt will
fail. And it will -- though perhaps not until after yet  another round of
delay tactics, of which CHORUS and the lobbying for it are a prominent
instance.

*Stevan Harnad*

--001a11c21edac48e7b04fdf3f3a5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Helvetica;font=
-size:12px">On Jul 11, 2014, at 6:34 AM, Stevan Harnad 
wrote:</span><br sty=
le=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px"><div class=3D"=
" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;direction:=
ltr">
<br class=3D""><blockquote 
type=3D"cite"><div 
dir=3D"ltr"></div></blockquot=
e><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div 
dir=3D"ltr"></div></blockquote><blockquote=
 type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div 
dir=3D"ltr"><span style=3D"co=
lor:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px=
"><b>SH:=C2=A0</b><a 
href=3D"http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/07/09/=
implementing-chorus-big-decisions-loom-for-publishers/">CHORUS</a>=C2=A0is =
a Trojan Horse, designed so that publishers retain 
control=C2=A0</span><spa=
n 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;lin=
e-height:23px">over the timing, terms and territory of any transition 
to Op=
en Access. =C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:geor=
gia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px">Think about 
it.=C2=A0</span><a h=
ref=3D"http://j.mp/TrojanHorseChorus" rel=3D"nofollow" 
style=3D"border:0px;=
font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;margin:0px;padding:0px;vertical-al=
ign:baseline;color:rgb(58,105,153);text-decoration:none;outline:none;line-h=
eight:23px">http://j.mp/TrojanHorseChorus</a></div>
</blockquote></blockquote><br></div><div 
class=3D"" style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,=
0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;direction:ltr"><a 
href=3D"http://sc=
holarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/07/09/implementing-chorus-big-decisions-loom=
-for-publishers/#comment-141773">David Wojick</a>=C2=A0replied 
(in the SSP =
Scholarly Kitchen):</div>
<div class=3D"" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:1=
2px;direction:ltr"><br></div><div class=3D"" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font=
-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;direction:ltr"></div><blockquote type=3D"c=
ite" style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px">
<div class=3D"" style=3D"direction:ltr"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);=
font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px"><b>DW:</b>=C2=A0=
Nonsense! It is the Feds that are asserting control via the US Public Acces=
s program. =C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:geor=
gia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px">CHORUS is an attempt to 
minimize=
 the damage that more Federal repositories like=C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"=
color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23=
px">PMC will cause. CHORUS will improve scientific communication while 
redu=
cing=C2=A0</span></div>
<div class=3D"" style=3D"direction:ltr"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);=
font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px">Federal 
expenses=
. It is an elegant solution to a difficult 
problem.</span></div></blockquot=
e>
<div class=3D"" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:1=
2px;direction:ltr"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,s=
erif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px"><br></span></div><div class=3D"" styl=
e=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;direction:ltr">
<span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px=
;line-height:23px"><b>SH:</b>=C2=A0The Feds are (rightly) 
asserting control=
 over the research output that the public funds=C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"=
color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23=
px">by mandating public access to it. Doesn=E2=80=99t sound like 
nonsense t=
o me. (Some) publishers=C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font=
-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px">are trying to 
slow t=
he provision of public access to publicly funded research (by embargoing it=
)=C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;=
font-size:14px;line-height:23px">and are angling to remain the ones who 
pro=
vide the access, so that they retain control and=C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D=
"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:2=
3px">proprietorship over both the research output and the provision of 
acce=
ss to it. That doesn=E2=80=99t=C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,5=
1);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px">sound 
like no=
nsense to me either =E2=80=94 just self-interest in a profound conflict of =
interest=C2=A0</span></div>
<div class=3D"" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:1=
2px;direction:ltr"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,s=
erif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px">between those who fund, conduct 
and p=
rovide the research output (the Feds, the public, 
and=C2=A0</span><span sty=
le=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-hei=
ght:23px">researchers) on the one hand, and those who manage the peer 
revie=
w of that research output=C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);fo=
nt-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px">(publishers). 
The =
peers (researchers) review for free. It is not nonsense to attempt to hold =
onto=C2=A0</span><font color=3D"#333333" 
face=3D"georgia, serif"><span styl=
e=3D"font-size:14px;line-height:23px">a cushy deal 
by=C2=A0=E2=80=9Cminimiz=
ing the damage=E2=80=9D for as long as 
possible=C2=A0</span></font><span st=
yle=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-he=
ight:23px">to the inflated income streams =C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"color=
:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px">t=
o which they</span><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,s=
erif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px">=C2=A0have long grown 
accustomed</spa=
n><span 
style=3D"font-size:14px;line-height:23px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-f=
amily:georgia,serif">. The Feds, the public, and researchers can only 
hope =
=C2=A0</span><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;f=
ont-size:14px;line-height:23px">that this damage-limitation attempt 
will fa=
il. And it will -- though perhaps not until after yet 
=C2=A0</span><span st=
yle=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px;line-he=
ight:23px">another round of delay tactics, of which CHORUS and the 
lobbying=
 for it are a prominent instance.</span></div>
<div class=3D"" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:1=
2px;direction:ltr"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,s=
erif;font-size:14px;line-height:23px"><br></span></div><div class=3D"" styl=
e=3D"color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px">
<span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:14px=
;line-height:23px"><b>Stevan 
Harnad</b></span></div><div><span style=3D"fon=
t-size:14px;line-height:23px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:georgia,serif"=
><br>
</span></div></div>

--001a11c21edac48e7b04fdf3f3a5--

        
--      
To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/boai-forum

[BOAI] Re: CHORUS is a Trojan Horse

From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum AT gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 09:23:10 -0400


Threading: [BOAI] Re: CHORUS is a Trojan Horse from amsciforum AT gmail.com
      • This Message
             [BOAI] Re: CHORUS is a Trojan Horse from amsciforum AT gmail.com

--001a11c11e46913b3c04fdfef538
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 7:14 AM, David Wojick <dwojick AT 
craigellachie.us>
 wrote:


> *DW: *The timing, terms and territory of the U.S. Public Access program
> are all controlled by the Feds.
>

"The Feds," as we all know, are government decision-makers whose 
decisions
are influenced by lobbying. The research community, though it is huge,
cannot afford -- and hence does not have -- a lobby. The publishing
industry, in contrast, has oodles of dosh for lobbying "The Feds," 
and does
so, vigorously, particularly about Open Access (OA), over which the
publishing industry is desperately trying to retain control.

In the US, this attempt to retain control takes the form of CHORUS: "*Let
us handle OA for you; we will see to it that (our) articles are made OA at
the end of (our!) OA embargoes; we will host or deposit our versions of our
articles for you*."

That is how the publishing lobby is trying to retain control over the
timing, terms and territory of the US Public Access program.


> *DW:* To claim otherwise is nonsense.
>

(I imagine that when you are lobbying or consulting for the Feds you
express yourself more courteously, David.)


> *DW:* The publishers have no control whatsoever. Which federal agencies,
> if any, will use CHORUS is completely up to those agencies.
>

 The publishers have no control over what policy "the Feds" 
ultimately
adopt, fortunately. They are merely trying to lobby to get them to cede the
control to them, by adopting CHORUS.

And you, David, as a consultant for OSTI, are attempting to incline them
toward adopting CHORUS. In this, I think you are as profoundly mistaken as
you have been in your prior advocacy against measures to combat global
warming <http://www.desmogblog.com/david-wojick>.

*DW: *If it is not going your way that is the choice of the Feds, not the
> publishers.
>

I am not a professional consultant or lobbyist. I am a researcher, and "my
way" is what I think is best for research, researchers, their 
institutions,
their funders, and the general public whose taxes pay for the research and
for whose benefit the research is conducted.

And mandatory Green Open Access Self-Archiving is not "my way" but 
the way
of 271 institutions and 90 Funders. It is one of those funders (OSTI) that
you are endeavouring to steer toward CHORUS. I and others are trying to
alert all OA policy-makers to the fact that CHORUS is a Trojan Horse and
very much against the interests of the scale and speed of growth of Open
Access.

*Stevan Harnad*

--001a11c11e46913b3c04fdfef538
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><span 
style=3D"font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px=
">On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 7:14 AM, David 
Wojick=C2=A0</span><span dir=3D"lt=
r" 
style=3D"font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">&lt;<a href=3D"mai=
lto:dwojick AT craigellachie.us" target=3D"_blank">dwojick AT 
craigellachie.us</a=
>&gt;</span><span 
style=3D"font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">=C2=
=A0wrote:</span><br 
style=3D"font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">
<div class=3D"gmail_extra" 
style=3D"font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:=
13px"><div 
class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote 
class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-lef=
t-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><b>DW:=C2=A0</b>The 
timing, terms and territory of=
 the U.S. Public Access program are all controlled by the 
Feds.</div></bloc=
kquote><div><br></div><div>&quot;The 
Feds,&quot; as we all know, are govern=
ment decision-makers whose decisions are influenced by lobbying. The resear=
ch community, though it is huge, cannot afford -- and hence does not have -=
- a lobby. The publishing industry, in contrast, has oodles of dosh for lob=
bying &quot;The Feds,&quot; and does so, vigorously, particularly about 
Ope=
n Access (OA), over which the publishing industry is desperately trying to =
retain control.=C2=A0</div>
<div><br></div><div>In the US, this attempt to retain 
control takes the for=
m of CHORUS: &quot;<i>Let us handle OA for you; we will see to it 
that (our=
) articles are made OA at the end of (our!) OA embargoes; we will host or d=
eposit our versions of our articles for you</i>.&quot;</div>
<div><br></div><div>That is how the publishing lobby is 
trying to retain co=
ntrol over the timing, terms and territory of the US Public Access program.=
</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote 
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0p=
x 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);bo=
rder-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><b>DW:</b>=C2=A0To claim 
otherwise is nonsense.</d=
iv></blockquote><div><br></div><div>(I imagine 
that when you are lobbying o=
r consulting for the Feds you express yourself more courteously, David.)</d=
iv>
<div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" 
style=3D"margin:0px 0px =
0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-l=
eft-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div 
bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><b>DW:</b>=C2=A0=
The publishers have no control whatsoever. Which federal agencies, if any, =
will use CHORUS is completely up to those agencies.</div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>=C2=A0The 
publishers have no control over =
what policy &quot;the Feds&quot; ultimately adopt, fortunately. They 
are me=
rely trying to lobby to get them to cede the control to them, by adopting C=
HORUS.=C2=A0</div>
<div><br></div><div>And you, David, as a consultant for 
OSTI, are attemptin=
g to incline them toward adopting CHORUS. In this, I think you are as profo=
undly mistaken as you have been in your=C2=A0<a 
href=3D"http://www.desmogbl=
og.com/david-wojick" target=3D"_blank">prior advocacy against 
measures to c=
ombat global warming</a>.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" 
style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p=
x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef=
t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div 
bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><b>DW:=C2=A0</b>If=
 it is not going your way that is the choice of the Feds, not the publisher=
s.</div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I am not a 
professional consultant or lobb=
yist. I am a researcher, and &quot;my way&quot; is what I think is best 
for=
 research, researchers, their institutions, their funders, and the general =
public whose taxes pay for the research and for whose benefit the research =
is conducted.</div>
<div><br></div><div>And mandatory Green Open Access 
Self-Archiving is not &=
quot;my way&quot; but the way of=C2=A0<a 
style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34)">271 =
institutions and 90 Funders</a>. It is one of those funders (OSTI) that 
you=
 are endeavouring to steer toward CHORUS. I and others are trying to alert =
all OA policy-makers to the fact that CHORUS is a Trojan Horse and very muc=
h against the interests of the scale and speed of growth of Open Access.</d=
iv>
<div class=3D""><div id=3D":1pa" 
class=3D"" tabindex=3D"0"><img class=3D"" =
src=3D"https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif"></div>=
</div><span class=3D""><font 
color=3D"#888888"><div><br></div><div><b>Steva=
n Harnad</b></div>
</font></span></div></div></div>

--001a11c11e46913b3c04fdfef538--

        
--      
To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/boai-forum

[BOAI] Re: CHORUS is a Trojan Horse

From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum AT gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 10:07:38 -0400


Threading: [BOAI] Re: CHORUS is a Trojan Horse from amsciforum AT gmail.com
      • This Message

--001a11c1515499584504fdff94ff
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 8:57 AM, David Wojick <dwojick AT 
craigellachie.us>
 wrote:


> *DW: *The embargo periods will be set by the Feds.
>

The embargo periods are set by the *publishers*. The Feds only set what is
the longest embargo period they will allow.


> *DW: *It is better to send users to the publisher's website than to a
> federal repository of accepted manuscripts, also cheaper.


It's neither better nor cheaper.

But it's best to send users where they already go: the indexes, harvesters
and search engines. Those in turn are best to harvest from *the
researchers' own institutional repositories*, which happen to be the
providers of all the research output, and are in the best position to
monitor and ensure that all OA mandates -- institutional mandates and
funder mandates -- are complied with for their own output.

And distributed institutional repositories are much cheaper than central
ones (which would in turm be much cheaper if they simply harvested the
metadata from the institutional repositories).

*DW: *Generally speaking one does not lobby Executive branch agencies.


No; but lobbyists can *consult* for them...


> *DW: *The publishers have had a few polite meetings with OSTP and the
> agency group but that is about it. We are all just waiting to see what th=
e
> Feds are going to do. Also, scholarly publishing is far too small to have
> "lobbying power." It is a tiny industry, almost beneath notice.
>

I think past and ongoing anti-OA lobbying attempts by the "tiny" 
publishing
industry have been quite large-scale, and are a matter of public record:
PRISM
<https://www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&lr=3D&q=3Dharnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%2=
0archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=3DUTF-8&tbm=3Dblg=
&tbs=3Dqdr:m&num=3D100&c2coff=3D1&safe=3Dactive&gws_rd=3Dssl#c2coff=3D1&hl=
=3Den&lr=3D&q=3Dprism+blogurl:http:%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=3Da=
ctive&tbm=3Dblg>
, EU
<http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/263-Publisher-anti-OA-Lo=
bby-Triumphs-in-European-Commission.html>
, RWA <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Works_Act>, Finch
<https://www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&lr=3D&q=3Dharnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%2=
0archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=3DUTF-8&tbm=3Dblg=
&tbs=3Dqdr:m&num=3D100&c2coff=3D1&safe=3Dactive&gws_rd=3Dssl#c2coff=3D1&hl=
=3Den&lr=3D&q=3DFinch+blogurl%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=
=3Dactive&tbas=3D0&tbm=3Dblg>,
etc. etc.

 *Stevan Harnad*

--001a11c1515499584504fdff94ff
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 8:57 AM, David 
Wojick=C2=A0<span d=
ir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:dwojick AT 
craigellachie.us" target=3D"_blank=
">dwojick AT 
craigellachie.us</a>&gt;</span>=C2=A0wrote:<br><div 
class=3D"gmai=
l_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">
<div>=C2=A0</div><div><blockquote 
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px=
 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);bor=
der-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><b>DW:=C2=A0</b>The 
embargo periods =
will be set by the Feds.=C2=A0<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>The embargo 
periods are set by the=C2=A0<i=
>publishers</i>. The Feds only set what is the longest embargo period 
they =
will allow.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote 
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(20=
4,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<b>DW:=C2=A0</b>It is better to send users to the 
publisher&#39;s website t=
han to a federal repository of accepted manuscripts, also cheaper.</blockqu=
ote><div><br></div><div>It&#39;s neither better 
nor cheaper.</div><div><br>=
</div>
<div>But it&#39;s best to send users where they already go: the 
indexes, ha=
rvesters and search engines. Those in turn are best to harvest from=C2=A0<i=
>the researchers&#39; own institutional repositories</i>, which 
happen to b=
e the providers of all the research output, and are in the best position to=
 monitor and ensure that all OA mandates -- institutional mandates and fund=
er mandates -- are complied with for their own output.=C2=A0</div>
</div><div><br></div><div>And distributed 
institutional repositories are mu=
ch cheaper than central ones (which would in turm be much cheaper if they s=
imply harvested the metadata from the institutional repositories).</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" 
style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p=
x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef=
t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><b>DW:=C2=A0</b>Generally 
speaking one does=
 not lobby Executive branch agencies.</blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>No; but lobbyists 
can=C2=A0<i>consult</i>=C2=A0for them=
...=C2=A0</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote 
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"=
margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,20=
4,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<b>DW:=C2=A0</b>The publishers have had a few polite meetings with 
OSTP and=
 the agency group but that is about it. We are all just waiting to see what=
 the Feds are going to do. Also, scholarly publishing is far too small to h=
ave &quot;lobbying power.&quot; It is a tiny industry, almost beneath 
notic=
e.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think past and 
ongoing anti-OA lobbying =
attempts by the &quot;tiny&quot; publishing industry have been quite 
large-=
scale, and are a matter of public record:=C2=A0<a 
href=3D"https://www.googl=
e.ca/search?hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3Dharnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivang=
elism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&amp;ie=3DUTF-8&amp;tbm=3Dblg&a=
mp;tbs=3Dqdr:m&amp;num=3D100&amp;c2coff=3D1&amp;safe=3Dactive&amp;gws_rd=3D=
ssl#c2coff=3D1&amp;hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3Dprism+blogurl:http:%2F%2Fopena=
ccess.eprints.org%2F&amp;safe=3Dactive&amp;tbm=3Dblg">PRISM</a>,=C2=A0<a hr=
ef=3D"http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/263-Publisher-anti-=
OA-Lobby-Triumphs-in-European-Commission.html">EU</a>,=C2=A0<a 
href=3D"http=
s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_Works_Act">RWA</a>,=C2=A0<a 
href=3D"http=
s://www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3Dharnad%20OR%20Harnad%20O=
R%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&amp;ie=3DUTF-8&am=
p;tbm=3Dblg&amp;tbs=3Dqdr:m&amp;num=3D100&amp;c2coff=3D1&amp;safe=3Dactive&=
amp;gws_rd=3Dssl#c2coff=3D1&amp;hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3DFinch+blogurl%3Ah=
ttp%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&amp;safe=3Dactive&amp;tbas=3D0&amp;tb=
m=3Dblg">Finch</a>, etc. etc.</div>
<div><br></div><div>=C2=A0<b>Stevan 
Harnad</b></div></div></div></div>

--001a11c1515499584504fdff94ff--

        
--      
To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/boai-forum

[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [options] [help]

 E-mail:  openaccess@soros.org .