51–60 of 69 posts
I wonder how much this has to do with the francophonic Quebec culture. Montreal has two big universities, McGill and UdM. McGill is primarily English-speaking, while UdM is primarily French-speaking. French Canada has always been far more politically activist than English Canada - they shift paradigms without a clutch.
University of Montreal should provide a link to Sci-Hub on their main library search page. Their students would appreciate it.
While price gouging by monopolistic publishers is certainly unpleasant, the very same universities complaining about the issue raise tuition and fees disproportionately. Save a few public universities, the Canadian and American universities operate just like the publishers they complain about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You may publish anywhere, but you must also publish it for free to the academic community. Is this possible? When publishing in a journal, I think you transfer your copyright to them; thereby preventing you from publishing the article any other way. Although as far as I know many journals allow a "pre-print version" to be published by the authors on their personal website.
If you transfer copyright at all, you typically only transfer it to the ACM, not Springer. Springer is just a contractor running a website and occasionally printing up phone books of papers that no one reads, and USB drives of PDFs people use for the week of the conference. See http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy
While price gouging by monopolistic publishers is certainly unpleasant, the very same universities complaining about the issue raise tuition and fees disproportionately. Save a few public universities, the Canadian and American universities operate just like the publishers they complain about.
I wish universities would take the lead in forcing open the journal monopoly. It would be really great if a major university like Stanford or Harvard said to its professors: You may publish anywhere, but you must also publish it for free to the academic community. Until a major university or five takes a stand on this, the rest of us must continue to fight.
> You may publish anywhere, but you must also publish it for free to the academic community. Is this possible? When publishing in a journal, I think you transfer your copyright to them; thereby preventing you from publishing the article any other way. Although as far as I know many journals allow a "pre-print version" to be published by the authors on their personal website.
You (as a presumed grad student) are the value in the system. If you give the journals your output don't be surprised that they build walls to protect it - they're useless without you and they know it.
They'll allow whatever they have to, and nothing else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You may publish anywhere, but you must also publish it for free to the academic community. Is this possible? When publishing in a journal, I think you transfer your copyright to them; thereby preventing you from publishing the article any other way. Although as far as I know many journals allow a "pre-print version" to be published by the authors on their personal website.
> When publishing in a journal, I think you transfer your copyright to them That is correct. I have done this for every publication I've ever put out (O(10)). There may be exceptions but this is certainly the dominant paradigm in the physical sciences. My two cents: this is bigger than any University. It will require a government funding agency (likely, NIH or NSF) to take a stand vis a vi the public availability of…
Additionally, many copyright transfer agreements expressly allow an institutional archival system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You may publish anywhere, but you must also publish it for free to the academic community. Is this possible? When publishing in a journal, I think you transfer your copyright to them; thereby preventing you from publishing the article any other way. Although as far as I know many journals allow a "pre-print version" to be published by the authors on their personal website.
> When publishing in a journal, I think you transfer your copyright to them That is correct. I have done this for every publication I've ever put out (O(10)). There may be exceptions but this is certainly the dominant paradigm in the physical sciences. My two cents: this is bigger than any University. It will require a government funding agency (likely, NIH or NSF) to take a stand vis a vi the public availability of…
Everyone in the physical sciences uses arXiv.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since a few years ago, any EU or UK public funded research (which is most university research) must be published as open-access. It is a requirement of the funding. So this is already happening. However, it will need to be done by a greater proportion of the world to be effective. The only problem is that the method of open access publishing is usually to pay a few grand to the publisher for the privilege.
Are you sure? I think it's only funders like Wellcome that require open access. My UK collaborators (in physical sciences) don't publish in open access journals.