Headlines By Email
Get LISNews via email! Enter Your Email Address:
Navigation
User login
Recent comments
- Nice analysis 1 month 2 weeks ago
- Justifying the practice... 2 months 1 day ago
- Details 2 months 3 weeks ago
- Congrats on 20 years. 3 months 1 week ago
- Happy Brithday 3 months 1 week ago
- Happy birthday, LISNews! 3 months 2 weeks ago
- chapter 1-8 claims 10 months 1 week ago
- Not a novella? 1 year 1 week ago
- women of a certain age (sounds like a criticism right there...) 1 year 8 months ago
- Reading as a punishment 1 year 10 months ago
Recent blog posts
- Appreciating the ‘powerful good’ of the public library
- New Domain, New Blog
- A.I. as virtual research mediators
- Fed Life Working Without Pay
- Dismantling Utopia: How Information Ended the Soviet Union
- Cites & Insights December 2018 (18:9) available
- Cites & Insights 18:7 (October 2018) available
- Cites & Insights 18:6 (September 2018) available
- Apparently Alex Jones isn't totally silenced
- Cites & Insights 18.5 (August 2018) available
Oooh
You should see what it's like in the UK.
The research councils (government funded research bodies) have a 6 month open access mandate unlike the NIH's 12 month.
This means we are paying for immediate or 6 month deposit in UKPMC rather than getting it free after 12 months. And when one paper published by Elsevier costs $3000 to publish it really adds up.
Open Access is wonderful, but seeing that we are giving our work to these publishers for free, and even doing peer review for free and maybe editorial work, why are we then having to pay for Open Access as well?
Surely they should be paying the public purse back for the right to sell on our work for profit?