[Open-access] Criteria for conference to move to Open Access

Thu Mar 21 05:43:06 UTC 2013

Dear all,
 I do not see the point of a reputable publisher if they already have their own reputation as a conference. Why don't they publish on an open public platform (e.g. http://www.sciencesconf.org/?lang=en ; which is anchored on an OA publication repository).
Cheers,
Laurent

Le 21 mars 2013 à 03:30, Daniel Mietchen a écrit :

> Dear all,
> 
> below please find a request originally sent to okfn-de: the organizers
> of OpenSym (formerly known as WikiSym) have been asked by the
> Wikimedia Foundation (a major sponsor of the event) to move to OA by
> next year[1], and now they are looking for the best way to go about
> that.
> 
> Thanks for any feedback,
> 
> Daniel
> 
> [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:WM_Wikisym/2013_WikiSym_OpenSym_Conference
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Dirk Riehle <dirk at riehle.org>
> Date: Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:14 PM
> Subject: [okfn-de] Meinung zu Open Access Publishern
> To: okfn-de at lists.okfn.org
> 
> 
> Guten Tag,
> 
> es gab vor kurzem auf dieser Liste ein Reaktion zu unserer Konferenz
> OpenSym http://opensym.org -- konkret die Frage, warum die
> Konferenzpapiere nicht Open Access gestellt werden. Die Gruende sind
> historisch etc. aber tatsaechlich wuerden wir auch gern dahin kommen,
> Open Access zu publizieren. Unter den aktuellen Modellen faellt uns
> aber die Wahl eines Publishers nicht leicht, wenn wir denn unseren
> aendern wollen. Unten an deswegen der Versuch einer Liste von
> Anforderungen. Feedback erwuenscht! Und danke dafuer schon einmal,
> 
> Dirk Riehle
> 
> Looking for Suitable Publisher for 2014
> 
> After reviewing our situation, we have identified the following requirements:
> 
> 1. Reputable publisher (must). Obviously a must.
> 
> 2. Established publisher (nice). The more established, the better, as
> long as the open access option is proper.
> 
> 3. Non-profit publisher (nice). Many of the problems in publishing,
> including overcharging for open access publishing, stems from the
> for-profit motives of the publishers. Thus, we prefer a stable
> non-profit publisher.
> 
> 4. Known in computer science (nice). With a strong background in
> computer science, we prefer a publisher who has a proper reputation in
> computer science. This requirement may become less important over
> time.
> 
> 5. Open access option (must). The publisher must allow for a proper
> open access option. The cheaper the better as long as the publisher is
> solid and has a long-term perspective.
> 
> 6. Reputable license choice (must). The available open access licenses
> should be widely acknowledged and should include the CC-BY and
> CC-BY-SA families. A publication permission (no copyright transfer) is
> also acceptable.
> 
> 7. No copyright transfer (nice). For those authors, who reject open
> access (or can't pay the fees) the publisher should only request a
> publication permission rather than require a copyright transfer.
> 
> 8. Allows for self-publication (must). With open access being an
> option, rather than a requirement, it is important that the publisher
> allows for self-publication (on the conference website and the
> authors' own websites).
> 
> 9. Reasonable and minimal service choice (nice). The publisher should
> allow for the submission of whole proceedings only and not require the
> purchase of additional editorial services (and impose consequent
> cost).
> 
> Requirements 1, 5, 6, and 8 are musts, requirements 2, 3, 4, 7, 9 are
> desirable but not required.
> 
> At present, the ACM Digital Library, our current publisher, does not
> offer 5 and 6, which are musts. They have made a recent announcement
> that they will provide these options, but details have not yet been
> provided.
> 
> Feedback is welcome!
> --
> Website: http://dirkriehle.com - Twitter: @dirkriehle
> Ph (DE): +49-157-8153-4150 - Ph (US): +1-650-450-8550
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-de mailing list
> okfn-de at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-de
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-de
> 
> _______________________________________________
> open-access mailing list
> open-access at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access

Laurent Romary
INRIA & HUB-IDSL
laurent.romary at inria.fr