4 ms·

> Under the agreement, all articles with a UC corresponding author published in more than 2,700 of Springer Nature’s journals will be open access by default, wi

> Under the agreement, all articles with a UC corresponding author published in more than 2,700 of Springer Nature’s journals will be open access by default, with the UC Libraries paying a portion of the open access fee on behalf of all authors. So, only the most widely-distributed papers will be "open access", and then only if the authors cough up an "open access fee"? Doesn't sound very open to me.

vermarish 6y ago
> Authors without available research funds for the remainder of the publishing fee can request that the Library cover the entire amount. Authors may also choose to opt out of open access publishing if they wish. I agree. Authors with limited fundings will have trouble getting their papers open access. The UC library claims that they may cover the fee, but hopefully this process will be simple. Otherwise, the papers most widely circulated might come from a smaller circle of authors with more access to funding, i.e. a net loss in scientific diversity of thought.
ajford 6y ago
Compared to the current state across nearly all academic fields, that is leaps and bounds more open. Outside of narrow fields, it was often the case that you would need to cough up an amount in the thousands to publish as open-access. Check out Elsevier's own page (https://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/open-access https://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/open-access) where they list a price between $150 USD and $6000 USD depending on journal and article. On that page you can find a pricing sheet where out of 2340 journals they list, only 83 have an open-access fee of less than $1000 USD. Springer Nature's fees seem similar, so hopefully this agreement brings down the cost as well. The whole of academic publishing is a mess, and really needs large universities pushing the open access agenda. In a perfect world, academic journals would be run by non-profit entities and exist solely for the betterment of academia, but sadly large publishers like Elsevier turn billions in profit each year, lining their pockets with money leeched out of grants and universities.
- pianoben 6y ago
  > Outside of narrow fields, it was often the case that you would need to cough up an amount in the thousands to publish as open-access. Itself a tremendous affront to the public, which funds most research.
atrettel 6y ago
It would also be much more open if it required all articles with a University of California coauthor to be open access by default. If the agreement only applies to articles with UC corresponding authors, it severely limits the scope of the agreement, especially since its usually the first author, not the corresponding author, who primary conducts the research and writes the paper itself. Edit: Still, this is good news and better than before.
jessriedel 6y ago
I don't understand. "Open access" means freely available for the reader. It doesn't mean zero cost for the author. This is established terminology.

vermarish 6y ago

> Authors without available research funds for the remainder of the publishing fee can request that the Library cover the entire amount. Authors may also choose to opt out of open access publishing if they wish. I agree. Authors with limited fundings will have trouble getting their papers open access. The UC library claims that they may cover the fee, but hopefully this process will be simple. Otherwise, the papers most widely circulated might come from a smaller circle of authors with more access to funding, i.e. a net loss in scientific diversity of thought.

ajford 6y ago

Compared to the current state across nearly all academic fields, that is leaps and bounds more open. Outside of narrow fields, it was often the case that you would need to cough up an amount in the thousands to publish as open-access. Check out Elsevier's own page (https://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/open-access https://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/open-access) where they list a price between $150 USD and $6000 USD depending on journal and article. On that page you can find a pricing sheet where out of 2340 journals they list, only 83 have an open-access fee of less than $1000 USD. Springer Nature's fees seem similar, so hopefully this agreement brings down the cost as well. The whole of academic publishing is a mess, and really needs large universities pushing the open access agenda. In a perfect world, academic journals would be run by non-profit entities and exist solely for the betterment of academia, but sadly large publishers like Elsevier turn billions in profit each year, lining their pockets with money leeched out of grants and universities.

pianoben 6y ago
> Outside of narrow fields, it was often the case that you would need to cough up an amount in the thousands to publish as open-access. Itself a tremendous affront to the public, which funds most research.

atrettel 6y ago

It would also be much more open if it required all articles with a University of California coauthor to be open access by default. If the agreement only applies to articles with UC corresponding authors, it severely limits the scope of the agreement, especially since its usually the first author, not the corresponding author, who primary conducts the research and writes the paper itself. Edit: Still, this is good news and better than before.

jessriedel 6y ago

I don't understand. "Open access" means freely available for the reader. It doesn't mean zero cost for the author. This is established terminology.