Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MIT Ends Elsevier Negotiations

news.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 269 posts

Re: MIT Ends Elsevier Negotiations

#11

Post by LeifCarrotson »

Here is the MIT Framework for Publisher Contracts:

https://libraries.mit.edu/scholarly/publishing/framework/

It requires that:

1. No author will be required to waive any institutional or funder open access policy to publish in any of the publisher’s journals.

2. No author will be required to relinquish copyright, but instead will be provided with options that enable publication while also providing authors with generous reuse rights.

3. Publishers will directly deposit scholarly articles in institutional repositories immediately upon publication or will provide tools/mechanisms that facilitate immediate deposit.

4. Publishers will provide computational access to subscribed content as a standard part of all contracts, with no restrictions on non-consumptive, computational analysis of the corpus of subscribed content.

5. Publishers will ensure the long-term digital preservation and accessibility of their content through participation in trusted digital archives.

6. Institutions will pay a fair and sustainable price to publishers for value-added services, based on transparent and cost-based pricing models.

Not surprising that Elsevier couldn't meet these requirements. #2 in particular seems antithetical to Elsevier's philosophy.

What was surprising was the number of institutions which had signed onto the framework - my alma mater included. I'm curious how many of these still have an Elsevier contract.

Re: MIT Ends Elsevier Negotiations

#15

Post by whatshisface »

An interesting side-effect of the shift to open access will be that anyone who's still publishing in closed-access journals will be at a severe disadvantage in getting cited compared to people who publish open access and make preprints available.

Re: MIT Ends Elsevier Negotiations

#16

Post by ghaff »

q3k wrote: post #10

You don't have permission to access "http://news.mit.edu/2020/guided-by-open-access-principles-mit-ends-elsevier-negotiations-0611" on this server. Reference #18.9d580317.1591886472.57240f92

The site is just being hugged a bit too hard.

Re: MIT Ends Elsevier Negotiations

#17

Post by calvinmorrison »

whatshisface wrote: post #15

An interesting side-effect of the shift to open access will be that anyone who's still publishing in closed-access journals will be at a severe disadvantage in getting cited compared to people who publish open access and make preprints available.

probably not as 1) most academics are just as familiar with extra-legal ways to access papers and 2) there's likely a few specific papers you need to cite, maybe from your PI, or a partner lab, or other person pretty close to your network who is working on the same type of stuff and you're building on it

Re: MIT Ends Elsevier Negotiations

#18

Post by jroseman93 »

Publishing industry is ripe for disruption. Publicly funded research should be publicly available. Any 'fees' charged by publishers should be proportional to the value-add those publishers provide. They can't claim the 'review process' is part of that monetary value-add when reviewers are almost never paid.

Re: MIT Ends Elsevier Negotiations

#19

Post by whatshisface »

calvinmorrison wrote: post #17
whatshisface wrote: post #15

An interesting side-effect of the shift to open access will be that anyone who's still publishing in closed-access journals will be at a severe disadvantage in getting cited compared to people who publish open access and make preprints available.

probably not as 1) most academics are just as familiar with extra-legal ways to access papers and 2) there's likely a few specific papers you need to cite, maybe from your PI, or a partner lab, or other person pretty close to your network who is working on the same type of stuff and you're building on it

I have seen a recent trend in my field of people citing recent papers for things that were literally known in the 1800s. However this is probably due to fraudulent citation rings and relationships, so I'm not sure if it contributes to my point.

Re: MIT Ends Elsevier Negotiations

#20

Post by enriquto »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #11

Here is the MIT Framework for Publisher Contracts: https://libraries.mit.edu/scholarly/publishing/framework/ It requires that: 1. No author will be required to waive any institutional or funder open access policy to publish in any of the publisher’s journals. 2. No author will be required to relinquish copyright, but instead will be provided with options that enable publication while also providing authors with gener…

> What was surprising was the number of institutions which had signed onto the framework - my alma mater included. I'm curious how many of these still have an Elsevier contract.

If you ever tried to dig deep into the internals of a large organization, you will notice that they are perfectly capable of managing a set of self-contradictory rules. It is actually an amazing power. At least, this was my experience.

For a mathematician used to third-excluded logic, it may seem impossible, since you can prove anything from "p and not p". Yet, these organizations manage to not be able to do arbitrary things from contradictory inputs, but somewhat sane things (some of the time).

Post reply on HN