Faculty perspectives
Randall Davis,
Professor of Computer Science and Engineering
“The models of reward differ significantly in the commercial environment and the academic research environment, and, importantly, rely on opposing mechanisms: where reputation depends on sharing and dissemination, commerce depends on the ability to exclude. The two camps are thus at times at odds for reasons deeply embedded in their world views. The difference matters because of the significance of academic research as a source of innovation: where considerable attention has been devoted to developing IP policies that encourage commercial innovation, less attention has been given to exploring what IP policies encourage the gift economy of research.” - from Dilemmas Faced by Creative People in IT (pdf)
JoAnne Yates,
Sloan Distinguished Professor of Management
“Like most of us, in the past I never questioned the role of commercial publishers in scholarly journal publication, nor the copyright agreements authors are asked to sign in order to publish in top journals. But today, libraries face a crisis with escalating journal prices, and authors and teachers face a bewildering array of new distribution options and associated copyright issues because of new electronic media.
We can no longer afford to stand on the sidelines. Instead, we need to get involved in our scholarly associations’ publication processes, engaging these issues and becoming more proactive voices in decision-making. We also need to educate ourselves about copyright issues so we can protect our own rights rather than signing them away.”
Catherine L. Drennan, Associate Professor of Chemistry
“Proponents of ‘open access’ talk about the benefit of ‘free’ information to colleges and individuals with less money. While free information sounds great, publishing articles costs money (an estimated $3000-$4000 per article) and someone has to pay. It is not clear whether movement from the current publishing model (mixing contributions of author pays, consumer pays, advertiser pays) to an elusive open access model (author pays) will hurt or help the scientists and colleges with fewer financial resources.
I, for one, am concerned about the open access (or author pays) model for journals such as Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. Professional societies such as the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology often subsidize journals that benefit their constituency, and they can do this because other profitable journals put them in the black. It is essential that we, as a community, consider the effects on all journals before making any drastic changes in publishing models. There is no such thing as a free lunch or a free article, and the question of who should pay should not be reduced to false simplicities.”
Leslie Kaelbling, Professor of Computer Science and Engineering, Founder and Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Machine Learning Research
“The Journal of Machine Learning Research (JMLR) was founded as a direct reaction against commercial publishers’ restrictive electronic distribution policies and unreasonable institutional subscription rates.
Our goals from the beginning were to offer free electronic access to all of our content to anyone with a browser, to publish the highest quality articles in our field, and to archive the journal via print copies held in libraries.”
Kaelbling was inteviewed by the Association of Research Libraries about her thoughts on digital scholarship in computer science as part of a series called “scholars speak.”
Hal Abelson, Professor of Computer Science and Engineering, Founding Director of Creative Commons
“The problem is that copyright law is not intended for the public. It is a law that is unintelligible for anyone other than copyright lawyers. It has these draconian notions that anyone copying something is a pirate. This is just a lot of nonsense. What the Internet has done is put a fundamental strain on copyright law.” Full interview
J. Brian Evans,
Professor of Geophysics
“It seems ironic that at the instant that digital communication technology has offered universal access to vast stores of information, the globalization and consolidation of the publishing industry and the legal conundrums posed by changing intellectual property laws have placed the traditional partnership of scholars, libraries, and publishers in jeopardy.
A growing number of people suggest that a serious crisis in academic publishing is developing. Perhaps the description as a crisis is overstated, but it is absolutely certain that these relationships are strained and that they will change. The debates about open access publishing, about the economics of publishing, and about fair use of research results have been joined, but the participants have largely been drawn from members of special interest groups.
Each of us within the academic community is a concurrent member of several different constituencies. As authors we want the widest dissemination of our journal articles, books, software, and visual media. As editors, we are genuinely invested in the success of a journal and its publisher. As educators, we wish to have free and flexible access to information to enrich our course materials. And as citizens and recipients of research funds, we are obligated to ensure unhindered access to the fruits of our intellectual endeavors to the widest possible audience.
Thus, as major producers on information, consumers of publications, and responsible and concerned citizens, we who are engaged in the life of the mind should be vigorously involved in the discussions. Yet, these debates have passed largely unnoticed within university. If we choose to remain uninvolved, our opinions will become –well — academic. In some circles, that description has come to mean ‘irrelevant’.”
Faculty Committee on the Library System
“The pressures on the scholarly communication system are significant and growing. We can no longer guarantee that our future students will have access to the scholarly literature they need. This not simply a problem for libraries; it is a problem for the academy.”
- from MIT Faculty Newsletter, April/May 2004
More faculty perspectives: Taking Action for Open Access to Research
For all text and photos on this page, All Rights Reserved.