Confronting the Crisis in Scientific Publishing: Latency, Licensing and Access

J. Contreras
{"title":"Confronting the Crisis in Scientific Publishing: Latency, Licensing and Access","authors":"J. Contreras","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2015885","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The serials crisis in scientific publishing can be traced to the long duration of copyright protection and the assignment of copyright by researchers to publishers. Over-protection of scientific literature has enabled commercial publishers to increase subscription rates to a point at which access to scientific information has been curtailed with negative social welfare consequences. The so-called uniformity costs imposed by such over-protection can be addressed by tailoring intellectual property rights, either through legal change or private ordering.Current open access channels of distribution offer alternative approaches to scientific publishing, but neither the Green OA self-archiving nor the Gold OA author-pays models has yet achieved widespread acceptance. Moreover, recent proposals to abolish copyright protection for academic works, while theoretically attractive, may be difficult to implement in view of current legislative and judicial inclinations. Likewise, funder open access mandates such as the NIH OA Policy, which are already responsible for the public release of millions of scientific articles, suffer from various risks and political uncertainty.In this paper, I propose an alternative private ordering solution based on latency equilibrium values observed in open access stakeholder negotiation settings. Under this proposal, research institutions would collectively develop and adopt publication agreements that do not transfer copyright ownership to publishers, but instead grant publishers a one-year exclusive period in which to publish a work. This limited period of exclusivity should enable the publisher to recoup its publishing costs and a reasonable profit through subscription revenues, while restoring control of the article copyright to the author at the end of the exclusivity period. This balanced approach address the needs of both publishers and the scientific community, and would, I believe, avoid many of the challenges faced by existing open access models.","PeriodicalId":437731,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Public Interest in Access to Legal Information (Sub-Topic)","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Public Interest in Access to Legal Information (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2015885","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

The serials crisis in scientific publishing can be traced to the long duration of copyright protection and the assignment of copyright by researchers to publishers. Over-protection of scientific literature has enabled commercial publishers to increase subscription rates to a point at which access to scientific information has been curtailed with negative social welfare consequences. The so-called uniformity costs imposed by such over-protection can be addressed by tailoring intellectual property rights, either through legal change or private ordering.Current open access channels of distribution offer alternative approaches to scientific publishing, but neither the Green OA self-archiving nor the Gold OA author-pays models has yet achieved widespread acceptance. Moreover, recent proposals to abolish copyright protection for academic works, while theoretically attractive, may be difficult to implement in view of current legislative and judicial inclinations. Likewise, funder open access mandates such as the NIH OA Policy, which are already responsible for the public release of millions of scientific articles, suffer from various risks and political uncertainty.In this paper, I propose an alternative private ordering solution based on latency equilibrium values observed in open access stakeholder negotiation settings. Under this proposal, research institutions would collectively develop and adopt publication agreements that do not transfer copyright ownership to publishers, but instead grant publishers a one-year exclusive period in which to publish a work. This limited period of exclusivity should enable the publisher to recoup its publishing costs and a reasonable profit through subscription revenues, while restoring control of the article copyright to the author at the end of the exclusivity period. This balanced approach address the needs of both publishers and the scientific community, and would, I believe, avoid many of the challenges faced by existing open access models.
面对科学出版的危机:延迟、许可和获取
科学出版的连载危机可以追溯到版权保护期过长和研究人员将版权转让给出版商的问题。对科学文献的过度保护使商业出版商能够提高订阅率,从而减少了获取科学信息的机会,从而对社会福利产生负面影响。这种过度保护带来的所谓统一成本,可以通过调整知识产权来解决,要么通过法律变更,要么通过私人订购。目前的开放获取发行渠道为科学出版提供了替代方法,但绿色开放获取自存档模式和金色开放获取作者付费模式都尚未得到广泛接受。此外,最近提出的取消学术作品版权保护的建议虽然在理论上很有吸引力,但鉴于目前的立法和司法倾向,可能难以实施。同样,资助开放获取的授权,如NIH OA政策,已经负责数百万科学文章的公开发布,遭受各种风险和政治不确定性。在本文中,我提出了一种基于开放获取利益相关者协商设置中观察到的延迟平衡值的替代私有排序解决方案。根据该提案,研究机构将共同制定并采用出版协议,该协议不将版权所有权转让给出版商,而是授予出版商一年的排他性出版期限。这种有限的专有权期应使出版商能够通过订阅收入收回其出版成本和合理利润,同时在专有权期结束时将文章版权的控制权交还给作者。这种平衡的方法解决了出版商和科学界的需求,我相信,它将避免现有开放获取模式面临的许多挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信