Experiments in publishing, Nature 431, 111 (09 September 2004). (Access restricted to subscribers.) A Nature editorial comments on the magazine's learning experience with its debate on access to the literature as applied to the recent NIH OA plan. They opine:
The impact of the NIH plan on the viability of journals and on non-profit learned societies is potentially serious, and questions as to how it might affect the various sorts of journals have been insufficiently explored ...
Nature, founded on the traditional publishing model, welcomes alternative models that deliver enhanced access, provided that they also foster added editorial and publishing value. Its publishers are experimenting with new publishing models. The Nature forum indicates that the viability of new models remains far from established.
For politicians or state institutions in effect to support one business model would be risky. Diverse approaches and competition are usually preferable, particularly if investment and deployment of technological and other innovations are to be encouraged.
Posted by
Garrett at 9/08/2004 04:09:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
