The Read-Publish model is a step in the right direction – it does much more (Global North) gold open access research, often keeps library editions at a level similar to that of previous years (which is a big gain over typical annual increases), and weakens the bargaining power of backfiles. To help you optimize your publishing and reading license, the Microbiology Society has created a few digital support materials that will help you spread the word to the faculty and inform potential authors of their right. If we commit to a new publishing paradigm that immediately converts scientific publishing into open access, reduces subscription costs for libraries, completely nullifies the current power structures of scientific publication and at the same time resolves global scientific inequalities, then our wait will not stop. A reading and publication agreement is an agreement in which the publisher receives a payment for reading and paying for the group publication in a single contract. This grouping introduces the payment of the publication into a contractual agreement, instead of being approached ad hoc by individual authors who opt for open access publication. In addition to the publication of contractual royalties, a transformative agreement aims to redirect the funds previously spent for subscription reading to the publishing component, often for the purpose of a cost-neutral reading and publication agreement compared to the previous subscription reading agreement. More aggressive approaches to libraries are aimed at reducing prices rather than taking a cost-neutral approach; While some successful agreements to date may be cost-neutral, others are actually more expensive (and cannot include price caps or controls on the full potential total cost). This is an alternative to the traditional subscription model. It helps authors and institutions gradually reverse the balance of their publications towards open access, making the process easier and more cost-effective. The corresponding authors of the publishing and reading institutions are identified using their email domains. If an author`s email domain corresponds to the compensation of a publishing and reading institution, we will ask the author to sign our STANDARD CC-BY Creative Commons license and publish his OA article at no additional cost and no embargo. Authors reserve the right to refrain from publishing their articles as OA. Thank you, Dan.
You have done the kind of business here, very eloquent, with which I usually agree. In reading and publishing, however, I fear that the argument “Perfect is the enemy-the-good” is not in the face of what otherwise looks like an imperfect but dignified springboard. There is a fairly basic formwork in the street, with reading and publishing going all out with the APC system (and the publishers 37 percent dominant). Alternatives such as the sub-cycle to the open (with the mountain tap and annual reviews as exciting pilots) and unionized models (such as the Open Library of Humanities and Scoap3) are not only fairer in the short term; They form the basis of a non-APC open access system that does not create barriers for authors instead of readers. At the Academic Publishing in Europe conference last month, a Springer Nature official boasted of the growing share of European scientists who publish open access (OA) in their magazines: more than 70% of authors based in Austria and the UK, 84% in the Netherlands and 90% in Sweden. The main reason is that the four countries have contracts with Springer Nature to cover the copyright costs that the for-profit colossus and his colleagues charge for the publication of OA.