Re: history of the DDG

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:58:08 GMT, James Arthur
<bogusabdsqy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:49:57 GMT, James Arthur
<bogusabdsqy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 02:06:14 GMT, James Arthur
<bogusabdsqy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 23:44:12 GMT, James Arthur wrote:

I don't think journals have any right to appoint
themselves middlemen between publicly-funded research
and the public good.

They impede progress and the free flow of information.
And they overcharge to boot.

They are in business to make money for their shareholders. They are most
definitely not charities. Prestigious paper journals are still important
for disseminating new research (although many have online versions too).

So what do you propose to do - nationalise them?

Spreading the information is good, useful, and worth something.

I propose publicly-funded research be public domain, free of
copyright. Then let the market decide what its distribution
is worth.

Cheers,
James Arthur

That is a better approach, perhaps give the publisher a year, then it
goes public domain. That will stop the most egregious abuses.

.