About one month ago, Fields Medalist Tim Gowers complained in a blog post about Elsevier’s publication practices, which inspired the mathematics PhD student Tyler Neylon to launch the campaign “The Cost of Knowledge“. The website makes three main accusations against Elsevier:
- They charge exorbitantly high prices for subscriptions to individual journals.
- In the light of these high prices, the only realistic option for many libraries is to agree to buy very large “bundles”, which will include many journals that those libraries do not actually want. Elsevier thus makes huge profits by exploiting the fact that some of their journals are essential.
- They support measures such as SOPA, PIPA and the Research Works Act, that aim to restrict the free exchange of information.
So far, 7434 researchers have signed a petition to publicly declare that they will not support any Elsevier journal unless they radically change how they operate. Most of the signers even specified that they “won’t publish, won’t referee, and won’t do editorial work” for Elsevier any more. And Elsevier, one of the largest and most profitable publishing houses of the world, seems to begin to falter.
First Elsevier saw the necessity to respond with an open letter entitled “A message to the research community: journal prices, discounts and access“. Again, Gowers took the time to respond point by point. Today, Elsevier publicly announced that it withdraws its support for the Research Works Act. However, this withdrawal is not the end of Elsevier’s fight against open access mandates:
While we continue to oppose government mandates in this area, Elsevier is withdrawing support for the Research Work Act itself. We hope this will address some of the concerns expressed and help create a less heated and more productive climate for our ongoing discussions with research funders.
As a researcher, I very much appreciate “The Cost of Knowledge”. But looking at what is going on in other sub-fields of copyright-based industries, I am still worried that in the end the minority of large publishers will succeed in undermining the Internet’s potential for open access to research; specifically, if researchers are not united on this issue, as was the case in “The German Open Access Uproar” in 2009.
Disclaimer: very recently I have reviewed for an Elsevier journal and right now I have one article under review in this journal.
(leonhard)
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 27, 2012 at 18:13
Holy poop! They did it! Elsevier withdraws support for the Research Works Act « Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week #AcademicSpring
[…] Elsevier Withdraws Support for Research Works Act, Continues Fight Against Open Access by Leonido Busch at Governance Across Borders. […]
February 27, 2012 at 20:50
Nima
Well considering the timing, I’d like to think that it was my latest blog post that prompted them to do it…. or maybe it was just the straw the broke the serpent’s back. http://paleoking.blogspot.com/
So far I’m not ready to trust ElSerpiente just yet, but they seem to at least be realizing the damage has been done. That said, regardless of how sorry Elsevier pretends to be, I would like to see scientists abandon it altogether in favor of open-access journals like PLoS ONE and APP, similar to how they abandoned ScienceBlogs when it started becoming an ad agency for Pepsi. Once you lose credibility in academia it’s gone for good, the same should apply to arms-dealing, journal-faking publishers.
One blow, but far from a victory. That still leaves Wiley, Springer, GSW, Taylor and Francis (which now has its fingers in JVP) and several others that have NOT withdrawn support for RWA.
March 1, 2012 at 07:07
The Big Picture | Inquiry Into Inquiry
[…] Elsevier Withdraws Support for Research Works Act, Continues Fight Against Open Access Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in […]
April 25, 2012 at 12:10
“Move Prestige to Open Access”: Harvard University weighs in on Open Access «
[…] earlier this year more than 10.000 researchers had joined the boycott of Elsevier (see also “Elsevier Withdraws Support for Research Works Act, Continues Fight Against Open Access“), last week Harvard University issued an official “Memorandum on Journal […]
August 31, 2015 at 17:30
Protest gegen neue „Sharing Policy“ des Wissenschaftsverlags Elsevier: Ausweg Open Access? | netzpolitik.org
[…] Open-Access-Zeitschriften, die es trotz dieser Pfadabhängigkeit wissenschaftlicher Reputation geschafft haben, sich zu etablieren, waren deshalb auf das Engagement besonders angesehener Akteure wie, im Fall der Public Library of Science, Nobelpreisträger angewiesen. Der zweite Hebel, um Open-Access-Zeitschriften zum Durchbruch zu verhelfen, sind Open-Access-Verpflichtungen bei überwiegend öffentlich finanzierter Forschung. Klarerweise hat Elsevier auch dagegen etwas einzuwenden und spricht sich in einer Erklärung klar gegen jede Form der Verpflichtung zu Open Access aus. […]