30 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2019
  2. Oct 2018
  3. Feb 2018
  4. Oct 2017
    1. When is a Publisher not a Publisher? Cobbling Together the Pieces to Build a Workflow Business

      Roger on the pattern of productizing scholarly workflows.

  5. Aug 2017
    1. this acquisition will position Elsevier as an increasingly dominant player in preprints, continuing its march to adopt and coopt open access.
  6. Jul 2017
  7. Jun 2017
    1. One of the world's largest science publishers, Elsevier, won a default legal judgement on 21 June against websites that provide illicit access to tens of millions of research papers and books. A New York district court awarded Elsevier US$15 million in damages for copyright infringement by Sci-Hub, the Library of Genesis (LibGen) project and related sites.

      I'd like to see them try to collect it!

    1. Althoughit cannot be taken for granted that the publication lists on RIDare error-free, these lists will probably be more reliable thantheautomatically generated lists (by Elsevier).

      Seems like a list which is automatically populated and then edited by an researcher would be better than one manually created. I don't think there's any factual basis for this claim.

  8. May 2017
  9. Mar 2017
    1. Elsevier is doing just that in their analysis of 20 years of global research from a gender perspective, published today

      Interesting angle to work in the significance of the day.

  10. May 2016
    1. the steady stream of obscene amounts of money to a parasitic industry with orthogonal interests to scholarship

      No truer words...

    1. Elsevier continues its march into data analytics at a pace that should terrify anyone on the ground in HE

      Policy makers and administrations have used Scival for years as a decision support resource. As discussed on Twitter, there is an open standard for these metrics: http://www.snowballmetrics.com/

      The data are useful to help support decisions about HE policy, though they are more useful in STEM than in the humanities, partly due to the lack of identifiers and comprehensive indexing of outputs in the humanities.

      Hopefully that makes it a little less terrifying.

  11. Dec 2015
  12. Nov 2015
    1. All six editors and all 31 editorial board members of Lingua, one of the top journals in linguistics, last week resigned to protest Elsevier’s policies on pricing and its refusal to convert the journal to an open-access publication that would be free online. As soon as January, when the departing editors’ noncompete contracts expire, they plan to start a new open-access journal to be called Glossa.”
    1. competitively priced

      I guess it depends on the reference. Elsevier is a business and will charge what the market will bear. As they should. So as scholars and researchers, how do we change what the market will bear? If, as is claimed by some of the new journals, e.g., Collabra, PeerJ, they can bring the cost way down, then when will the pressure be put on the commercial publishers to do the same. And when will we start to question what we get for the extra money?

    2. as the world’s third largest open access publisher,

      But aren't they the largest scholarly publisher? I'm not sure I would brag about this.

    3. We founded Lingua 66 years ago.

      According to this blog, this is not true.

    4. transfer ownership of the journal to the collective of editors

      Collection of editors, not an individual editor

  13. Jun 2015
  14. Feb 2014
    1. National governments are also weighing in on the issue. The UK government aims this April to make text-mining for non-commercial purposes exempt from copyright, allowing academics to mine any content they have paid for.

      UK government intervening to make text-mining for non-commercial purposes exempt from copyright.

    2. “Our plan is just to wait for the copyright exemption to come into law in the United Kingdom so we can do our own content-mining our own way, on our own platform, with our own tools,” says Mounce. “Our project plans to mine Elsevier’s content, but we neither want nor need the restricted service they are announcing here.”

      This seems to be a sensible move rather than be hindered not by copyright, but by the onerous contract that Elsevier wants to put in place.

    3. some researchers feel that a dangerous precedent is being set. They argue that publishers wrongly characterize text-mining as an activity that requires extra rights to be granted by licence from a copyright holder, and they feel that computational reading should require no more permission than human reading. “The right to read is the right to mine,” says Ross Mounce of the University of Bath, UK, who is using content-mining to construct maps of species’ evolutionary relationships.

      "The right to read is the right to mine."

  15. Jan 2014
    1. The academic publisher Elsevier has contributed to many U.S. Congressional representatives, pushing the Elsevier-supported Research Works Act, which among other things would have forbidden any effort by any federal agency to ensure taxpayer access to work financed by the federal government without permission of the publisher.

      What other legislation has Elsevier pushed?