Re: Savings from Converting to On-Line-Only: 30%- or 70%+ ?

From: Arthur Smith <apsmith_at_APS.ORG>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1998 09:37:58 -0400

On Mon, 31 Aug 1998 21:08:39 -0400, Guedon Jean-Claude <guedon_at_ERE.UMONTREAL.CA> wrote:

>On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Arthur Smith wrote:
> [...]
>> 4. Non-profits turn to government funding. For-profits cry foul and
>> unfair competition.
>Regarding point 4 above. So what if Elsevier cries foul in the States or
>in Canada?

There are plenty of commercial US publishers of scientific information (and no
I will not name them here) some of which have proven quite litigious in
the past. Who among non-profits and professional societies can fight possibly
multi-million dollar law suits, coupled with million-dollar political
lobbying? Remember this is a multi-billion dollar industry you are trying
to radically change.

>Libraries should strongly consider deciding that no subscription will be
>taken for a journal that claims to be scholarly AND that makes a profit
>or belongs to a profit-making entity.

Fine with me, but scientific societies that are also non-profit publishers
are not in a position to promote this kind of idea (we've dealt with
enough lawsuits in the past thankyou). And taken seriously, your
proposal would destroy a lot of journals with long traditions of excellence.

   Arthur (
Received on Tue Aug 25 1998 - 19:17:43 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:45:25 GMT