background preloader

The Cost of Knowledge

Related:  Publications scientifiques

Research Works Act - Wikipedia On February 27, 2012 Elsevier, a major publisher, announced that it was withdrawing support for the Act.[12] Later that day, Issa and Maloney issued a statement saying that they would not push for legislative action on the bill.[13] Reception[edit] The bill was supported by the Association of American Publishers (AAP)[14] and the Copyright Alliance.[15] Opponents stressed particularly the effects on public availability of biomedical research results, such as those funded by NIH grants, submitting that under the bill "taxpayers who already paid for the research would have to pay again to read the results".[30] Mike Taylor from the University of Bristol said that the bill's denial of access to scientific research would cause "preventable deaths in developing countries" and "an incalculable loss to science", and said Representatives Issa and Maloney were motivated by multiple donations they had received from the academic publisher Elsevier.[31] Related legislation and executive action[edit]

The Sheridan Libraries Blog » Background on the Elsevier Boycott Background on the Elsevier Boycott If you’ve heard about the boycott of Elsevier, you may have a few questions about why this is happening. Below is an overview, followed by a boat-load of links. Only Elsevier? BackgroundSTEM academic publishing has been in a ferment for quite some time. RecentlyOSTP recently posted responses to a request for information about public access to scholarly publishing. The Argument Here's the short version of the academics' argument. What keeps all the researchers from moving to the new Open Access publishing outlets like PLoS or BioMed Central? Links(I will try to keep these links updated. ShareThis About Robin Sinn Robin is a science librarian with a strong interest in scholarly communications.

Accueil - Libre accès - Guides (français) at Polytechnique Montréal L’objectif de ce guide est de fournir des informations de base en lien avec le libre accès à la littérature scientifique, sujet qui concerne les chercheurs de Polytechnique Montréal appelés à publier divers types de documents. Le libre accès à l’information scientifique s’inscrit dans un mouvement plus large. Dans le milieu académique, le libre accès à la littérature scientifique vise à rendre accessibles gratuitement en ligne les résultats de la recherche, sans compromis de qualité. C'est un mouvement qui transforme le monde de la publication scientifique. L’idée du libre accès est de rendre l’information publique, de mettre des informations (articles, données, etc.), souvent issues de la recherche subventionnée, à la disposition de tous afin que chacun puisse les utiliser et les étudier. Pour être qualifiées d’ouvertes ou libres, ces informations doivent, entre autres, être sans barrière monétaire et dans des formats communs généralement accessibles.

Ban Elsevier Please take the pledge not to do business with Elsevier. 404 scientists have done it so far: • The cost of knowledge. You can separately say you 1) won’t publish with them, 2) won’t referee for them, and/or 3) won’t do editorial work for them. At least do number 2): how often can you do something good by doing less work? When a huge corporation relies so heavily on nasty monopolistic practices and unpaid volunteer labor, they leave themselves open to this. This pledge website is the brainchild of Tim Gowers, a Fields medalist and prominent math blogger: • Tim Gowers, Elsevier: my part in its downfall and In case you’re not familiar with the Elsevier problem, here’s something excerpted from my website. The problem and the solutions The problem of highly priced science journals is well-known. Luckily, there are also two counter-trends at work. There are also a growing number of free journals. Unsurprisingly, the response from publishers was chilly. What we can do

Les revues Elsevier – quelques faits Le texte ci-dessous est la traduction d’un extraordinaire billet de Tim Gowers, initiateur du Cost of Knowledge. En dépit de son immense intérêt, la longueur de l’article m’a semblé pouvoir être un frein même aux anglophones — et parmi eux, les nombreux plus expérimentés que moi seront certainement en mesure de critiquer cette traduction. Je l’ai voulue pragmatique : l’objectif était de rendre ce texte accessible aux bibliothécaires francophones, pas d’élaborer une traduction parfaite. Donc dans certains cas j’ai retenu une expression à peu près exacte, juste parce qu’elle me paraissait suffisamment proche de l’origine pour n’être pas une trahison, et parce qu’une alternative plus juste ne me venait pas. Dans d’autres cas, j’ai même laissé l’expression anglaise, ne trouvant pas d’équivalent français (qui existe sans doute !) et jugeant que ça se comprenait très bien quand même ainsi. Il y a un peu plus de deux ans, The Cost of Knowledge initiait un boycott sur les revues d’Elsevier.

What actually is Elsevier’s open-access licence? « Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week Like many scholarly publishers that work primarily on the subscription model, Elsevier allows authors to opt in to open access by paying a fee, currently $3000. (While that’s more than twice the $1350 that PLoS ONE charges, it’s comparable to the $2900 that PLoS Biology charges, identical to Springer’s $3000 fee, and slightly less than Taylor & Francis’s “Open Select” fee of $3250.) (By the way, Elsevier have rather a good policy in connection with this fee: “Authors can only select this option after receiving notification that their article has been accepted for publication. This prevents a potential conflict of interest where a journal would have a financial incentive to accept an article.”) But what are we actually allowed to do with Elsevier’s open-access articles? Is this true of Elsevier’s open-access articles? I don’t know. Can anyone help by pointing me to a clear statement on Elsevier’s site of what licence their open-access articles are published under? My reply to Alicia:

Libre accès à l’information scientifique et technique Elsevier — my part in its downfall « Gowers's Weblog The Dutch publisher Elsevier publishes many of the world’s best known mathematics journals, including Advances in Mathematics, Comptes Rendus, Discrete Mathematics, The European Journal of Combinatorics, Historia Mathematica, Journal of Algebra, Journal of Approximation Theory, Journal of Combinatorics Series A, Journal of Functional Analysis, Journal of Geometry and Physics, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, Journal of Number Theory, Topology, and Topology and its Applications. For many years, it has also been heavily criticized for its business practices. Let me briefly summarize these criticisms. 1. 2. 3. 4. I could carry on, but I’ll leave it there. It might seem inexplicable that this situation has been allowed to continue. A possible explanation is that to do something about the situation requires coordinated action. What about coordination between academics? If top-down approaches to the problem don’t work, then what about bottom-up approaches? Like this:

Mendeley Data en version test Mendeley était jusqu’alors une application en ligne pour organiser annoter éditer sa partager sa bilbiographie (voir les billets qui abordent Mendeley sur ce blog). L’application est particulièrement utilisée pour récupérer les millions de publications en PDF que les auteurs utilisateurs ont déposé plus ou moins légalement sur la plateforme. Mendeley a été racheté par Elsevier en 2013. Depuis quelques années le partage des données scientifiques liées aux résultats de la publication devient un enjeu majeur pour l’intégrité scientifique (pouvoir vérifier le bien fondé des articles) mais aussi pour valoriser la publication, permettre la réutilisation des données etc. Avec Mendeley data, Elsevier permet aux chercheurs utilisant Mendeley de diffuser leurs données de recherche. Les données sont archivées de manière permanente dans DANS (Data Archiving and Networked Services) situé aux Pays-Bas. un exemple de dataset dans Mendeley Data source :

You are Elsevier: time to overcome our fears and kill subscription journals Having spent a decade fighting the scientific publishing establishment, the last few weeks have been kind of fun. Elsevier, the Dutch publishing conglomerate that has long served as the poster child for all that is wrong with the industry, has come under withering criticism for pushing legislation that would prevent the US government from making the results of taxpayer funded research available to the public. But amidst all this richly deserved opprobrium, we must not forget that Elsevier are in a position to behave so poorly because we let them. Publishers control the paywalls that restrict access to the scientific literature. But individual researchers control the fate of their own papers. And the only reason a paywall ever stands between anyone and a paper they want to read is because its authors chose to put it there. The scientific community could decide tomorrow to eliminate restrictions on access to the research literature. I love how Kevin Zelnio puts it:

Related: