MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
1–10 of 230 posts
Re: MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
#2Aaron Swartz would have liked some of those principles. This is a small, "better late than never" step for most of us, but for Aaron...it's more like "too little, too late."
Re: MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
#3Question: What is Elsevier’s value proposition? Could that be replicated by on open source offering?
Re: MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
#4What library are the researchers getting their access through now? Are they saying the MIT library bought digital copies of all those publications?
Re: MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
#5Question: What is Elsevier’s value proposition? Could that be replicated by on open source offering?
The own the prestigious journal names, you can trivially do what they do, but you lack the prestige.
Re: MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
#6What library are the researchers getting their access through now? Are they saying the MIT library bought digital copies of all those publications?
They are using a service called Article Galaxy, which is just a proxy that pays for per-article access when individual users request it. MIT Libraries get the bill from Article Galaxy.
The article states that MIT pays $300,000 annually for individual request fees, far less than the prior contract amount.
Re: MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
#7US universities could create enough pressure on Elsevier to make them seriously reconsider their practices.
Re: MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
#8> During negotiations with Elsevier in 2020, MIT presented its principles to the publisher’s representatives as the basis for new contract negotiations. Once it was clear that the company would not agree to advancing MIT’s principles outlined in the Framework (such as allowing all authors to retain their copyright), the Libraries made the decision not to renew its contract, effective that July.
> In 2022, Elsevier approached MIT with a request to re-engage in contract discussions. This time, Bourg was joined by an MIT contracts attorney in the negotiation, and once again, the Libraries’ asks were based on the MIT Framework for Publisher Contracts. MIT requested an outlining of the goods and services they would be paying for, some means of using the MIT contract to advance equity in the scholarly communications system, and a contract that allowed all MIT authors (including non-corresponding authors) to have their articles openly available in a repository without an embargo. However, the company returned to MIT with its standard read and publish contract proposal, and MIT once again decided to remain out of contract.
This is such a glorious example of disenshittify or die [0]. Elsevier keeps pretending it has the upper hand to force itself on institutions, but the less institutions play their game, the more obvious it becomes that nothing of value was lost.
[0] https://pluralistic.net/2024/08/17/hack-the-planet/#how-abou...
Re: MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
#9Question: What is Elsevier’s value proposition? Could that be replicated by on open source offering?
It already is: arxiv.org.
Re: MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing Elsevier contract
#10Aaron Swartz would have liked some of those principles. This is a small, "better late than never" step for most of us, but for Aaron...it's more like "too little, too late."
My first thought as well