We've failed: paid publication , pirates win.

post by morganism · 2017-09-16T21:53:17.851Z · LW · GW · Legacy · 3 comments

This is a link post for http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/leap.1116/full

3 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by [deleted] · 2017-09-17T01:07:29.468Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Quick summary:

Author Toby Green acknowledges that while others were bickering about other ways to sort of open up open-access-type journals, they are all already dwarfed by the fact that Sci-Hub pretty much already has all the articles.

Green then goes on an analogy involving how some airlines have "unbundled" their tickets, making consumers pay extra for add'l baggage, more seat room, drinks, food, etc. Green says that maybe publishers should switch to a similar approach, where journals are free to read, but additional premiums would cost money.

Replies from: Raemon
comment by Raemon · 2017-09-20T19:32:11.330Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Thanks, I attempted to read this and felt like I was missing enough context that doing so was annoying. Appreciate the summary.

comment by morganism · 2017-09-16T21:54:48.887Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

-Sci-Hub has made nearly all articles freely available using a black open access model, leaving green and gold models in its dust.

"What I find startling is not that a room full of UKSG delegates seem to be condoning piracy and supporting black open access (Björk, 2017), but 15 years on from the Budapest Open Access Declaration, a pirate site is needed at all. After all, the pirates have long since been chased out of the music business"