Comment. NPG journals do this periodically and every time I ask the same question. If NPG is willing to forego revenue for the critical first six months, then why not increase usage, impact, and good will by making the articles free online forever? The six months of free access are subsidized, in this case by SAFC Biosciences. If the subsidy covers the peer-review, editing, and publishing --which is not clear--, then why is the trickle of revenue for access after six months worth the lost usage and impact?
Posted by
Peter Suber at 9/08/2005 11:24:00 AM.
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.
