#doubledipping — Public Fediverse posts

Update. Here's the key passage from the new #Trump budget proposing a "Government-Wide Prohibition on Publishing and Subscription Fees." See p. 17.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/budget_fy2027.pdf

"The Budget ends the diversion of research dollars to high priced publishers across the Government. The Budget prohibits the use of Federal funds for expensive subscriptions to academic journals and prohibitively high publishing costs unless required by Federal statute or approved in advance by a Federal agency. Research funded by taxpayers should be publicly accessible; yet many publications charge the Government to both publish and to access the same research study. There are numerous low-cost outlets to make federally-funded research publicly available."

h/t Jim O'Donnell

#APCs #DoubleDipping #OpenAccess #Publishing #ScholComm #Subscriptions

The _Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing_ is converting from #hybrid to #APC-based #OpenAccess. One of its motives to escape the #DoubleDipping of the hybrid model. "Although this hybrid approach was well-intentioned, it created a paradoxical situation where institutions pay [and publishers receive] both subscription fees and publication charges."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10877-025-01342-7

PS: Glad to see it acknowledge the double dipping. Too many hybrid journals don't do that. Next step, escape the inequity and author-side barriers of the APC model.

#APCs #GoldOA #ReadAndPublish #ScholComm #SpringerNature

#COAR (@coar_repositories) is exactly right about what's wrong with the #ACS and #IEEE demands that their authors pay them a fee for the right to deposit their accepted author manuscripts (#AAMs) in #OpenAccess #repositories.
https://coar-repositories.org/news-updates/unfair-publisher-fees-for-deposit-into-repositories-highlight-the-need-for-authors-to-exercise-their-rights/

<blockquote>
* The charges applied are completely arbitrary and not based on any real service provision (for example, IEEE applies a fee to authors who want to apply a CC-BY licence to their AAM; and ACM applies a fee for removing the embargo period). They are just another funding stream for publishers that are already making huge profits.
* Deposit fees disadvantage authors who do not have funding to pay
* These fees amount to #DoubleDipping since the final published version of the AAM is made available behind a paywall with no discount
* This practice prevents universities and research organisations from creating an accessible record of their scholarly output.
</blockquote>

And COAR is exactly right about the solution: author #RightsRetention. When authors retain key rights, they don't need publisher permission to deposit their works in OA repositories -- or to use and reuse them in other important ways as well.

PS: See my similar argument on a related ACS move last year.
https://fediscience.org/@petersuber/112688754504974477

#Publishers #Copyright #ScholComm