home.social

#green-oa — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #green-oa, aggregated by home.social.

fetched live
  1. @ombialik
    I completely support the message about preprints.

    But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

  2. @ombialik
    I completely support the message about preprints.

    But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

  3. @ombialik
    I completely support the message about preprints.

    But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

  4. @ombialik
    I completely support the message about preprints.

    But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

  5. @ombialik
    I completely support the message about preprints.

    But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).

  6. Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
    The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
    🔗 tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
    #Beilstein75 #GreenOA

  7. Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
    The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
    🔗 tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
    #Beilstein75 #GreenOA

  8. Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
    The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
    🔗 tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
    #Beilstein75 #GreenOA

  9. Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
    The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
    🔗 tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
    #Beilstein75 #GreenOA

  10. Did you know that the Beilstein-Institut runs a preprint server?
    The #BeilsteinArchives is a free, #OpenAccess platform for rapidly publishing preprints and supporting information. The platform is specifically designed to fast-track original research headed for the Beilstein Journals.
    🔗 tinyurl.com/yth4x28b
    #Beilstein75 #GreenOA

  11. Développement des "repositories fees" chez ACS puis IEEE en réaction au déploiement par les chercheurs.ses de la stratégie de rétention des droits

    "Le Consortium Couperin.org refuse ce modèle et ne souhaite pas de coûts additionnels pour permettre à ses
    chercheurs de publier. Il souhaite éviter le développement de ce type de frais chez d’autres éditeurs."

    👉 hal.science/hal-05654837v1

    #HAL #embargo #RetentionRightsStrategy #GreenOA

  12. Développement des "repositories fees" chez ACS puis IEEE en réaction au déploiement par les chercheurs.ses de la stratégie de rétention des droits

    "Le Consortium Couperin.org refuse ce modèle et ne souhaite pas de coûts additionnels pour permettre à ses
    chercheurs de publier. Il souhaite éviter le développement de ce type de frais chez d’autres éditeurs."

    👉 hal.science/hal-05654837v1

    #HAL #embargo #RetentionRightsStrategy #GreenOA

  13. Développement des "repositories fees" chez ACS puis IEEE en réaction au déploiement par les chercheurs.ses de la stratégie de rétention des droits

    "Le Consortium Couperin.org refuse ce modèle et ne souhaite pas de coûts additionnels pour permettre à ses
    chercheurs de publier. Il souhaite éviter le développement de ce type de frais chez d’autres éditeurs."

    👉 hal.science/hal-05654837v1

    #HAL #embargo #RetentionRightsStrategy #GreenOA

  14. Développement des "repositories fees" chez ACS puis IEEE en réaction au déploiement par les chercheurs.ses de la stratégie de rétention des droits

    "Le Consortium Couperin.org refuse ce modèle et ne souhaite pas de coûts additionnels pour permettre à ses
    chercheurs de publier. Il souhaite éviter le développement de ce type de frais chez d’autres éditeurs."

    👉 hal.science/hal-05654837v1

    #HAL #embargo #RetentionRightsStrategy #GreenOA

  15. "We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
    statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-a
    (#paywalled)

    There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

    * The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

    * The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

    * The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

    #FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

  16. "We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
    statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-a
    (#paywalled)

    There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

    * The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

    * The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

    * The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

    #FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

  17. "We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
    statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-a
    (#paywalled)

    There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

    * The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

    * The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

    * The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

    #FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

  18. "We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
    statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-a
    (#paywalled)

    There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

    * The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

    * The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

    * The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

    #FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

  19. "We published in Nature Medicine in 2025 for free. In 2026, it cost us $12,850."
    statnews.com/2026/06/11/open-a
    (#paywalled)

    There's a lot going on in this confused and confusing article.

    * The author and her co-authors were foolish to pay $12,850 for a Nature Medicine APC. They could have published the same article for a lower fee, or no fee, at many other respected journals. They didn't pay for quality. They paid for journal branding or prestige.

    * The author says her team paid for the APC "to comply" with the NIH policy. Untrue. Complying with the NIH policy is free of charge. They paid the APC to publish in Nature Medicine.

    * The author says that APCs "pose barriers to making NIH-funded research available to the public." Untrue. NIH makes funded research available to the public through #PubMedCentral (#GreenOA) no matter where the author chooses to publish and no matter whether the author chooses to pay an APC.

    #FunderPolicies #Funders #NIH #OpenAccess #ScholComm

  20. 1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers researchprofessionalnews.com/r

    2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Do (PDF)

    I shall watch with great interest...

    HT @mpe

    #RightsRetention #GreenOA

  21. 1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers researchprofessionalnews.com/r

    2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Do (PDF)

    I shall watch with great interest...

    HT @mpe

    #RightsRetention #GreenOA

  22. 1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers researchprofessionalnews.com/r

    2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Do (PDF)

    I shall watch with great interest...

    HT @mpe

    #RightsRetention #GreenOA

  23. 1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers researchprofessionalnews.com/r

    2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Do (PDF)

    I shall watch with great interest...

    HT @mpe

    #RightsRetention #GreenOA

  24. 1.) The University of Nottingham has divested from big deal packages with five major publishers researchprofessionalnews.com/r

    2.) The University of Nottingham also has an institutional rights retention policy nottingham.ac.uk/Governance/Do (PDF)

    I shall watch with great interest...

    HT @mpe

    #RightsRetention #GreenOA

  25. April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
    🔸 #OAForward initiative
    🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
    🔸 National vision for archives in England
    🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
    🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
    mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/britis

  26. April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
    🔸 #OAForward initiative
    🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
    🔸 National vision for archives in England
    🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
    🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
    mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/britis

  27. April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
    🔸 #OAForward initiative
    🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
    🔸 National vision for archives in England
    🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
    🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
    mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/britis

  28. April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
    🔸 #OAForward initiative
    🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
    🔸 National vision for archives in England
    🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
    🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
    mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/britis

  29. April issue of our Scholarly Communications Newsletter is out! #ScholComm
    🔸 #OAForward initiative
    🔸 CAUL's 100,000th OA article
    🔸 National vision for archives in England
    🔸 British Academy's report on #greenOA for longform works
    🔸 List of #diamondOA initiatives and more
    mailchi.mp/a26423ef221e/britis

  30. The world’s leading cancer charity to stop funding open access publishing because of hybrid journals

    As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

    #cancer #cancerResearchUk #diamondOa #DORA #embargo #goldOa #greenOa #hybridJournals #openAccess #paywall #peterSuber #publishers #rcuk #research #researchCouncilsUk walledculture.org/the-worlds-l
  31. The world’s leading cancer charity to stop funding open access publishing because of hybrid journals

    As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

    #cancer #cancerResearchUk #diamondOa #DORA #embargo #goldOa #greenOa #hybridJournals #openAccess #paywall #peterSuber #publishers #rcuk #research #researchCouncilsUk walledculture.org/the-worlds-l
  32. The world’s leading cancer charity to stop funding open access publishing because of hybrid journals

    As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

    #cancer #cancerResearchUk #diamondOa #DORA #embargo #goldOa #greenOa #hybridJournals #openAccess #paywall #peterSuber #publishers #rcuk #research #researchCouncilsUk walledculture.org/the-worlds-l
  33. The world’s leading cancer charity to stop funding open access publishing because of hybrid journals

    As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

    #cancer #cancerResearchUk #diamondOa #DORA #embargo #goldOa #greenOa #hybridJournals #openAccess #paywall #peterSuber #publishers #rcuk #research #researchCouncilsUk walledculture.org/the-worlds-l
  34. The world’s leading cancer charity to stop funding open access publishing because of hybrid journals

    As numerous posts on this blog have emphasised, the underlying idea of open access (OA) – allowing anyone to read and share published academic research for free – is great in principle, but in practice has failed in important ways. That’s because traditional academic publishers have subverted the open access model to such an extent that the costs for research institutions of publishing in […]

    #cancer #cancerResearchUk #diamondOa #DORA #embargo #goldOa #greenOa #hybridJournals #openAccess #paywall #peterSuber #publishers #rcuk #research #researchCouncilsUk walledculture.org/the-worlds-l
  35. #CancerResearchUK will stop paying #APCs for funded researchers.
    news.cancerresearchuk.org/2026

    PS. So far, so good. There are strong reasons to move away from APCs. For a summary, see Recommendation 3 of the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement in 2022. (Disclosure: I was the lead author.)
    budapestopenaccessinitiative.o

    Unfortunately the Cancer Research UK announcement is marred by several false assertions and assumptions about #OpenAccess.

    * Its narrow decision is to stop funding APCs, but its headline is that it will stop funding OA publishing as such. It leaves the distinct false impression that all OA journals charge APCs.

    * Deep in the text it says that OA "hasn't worked. At least not in its current form." That looks like a recognition that not all OA depends on APCs. But it isn't explicit and didn't prevent careless language elsewhere in the statement.

    * It never acknowledges that no-APC OA (#DiamondOA) journals exist, let alone that they constitute the majority of OA journals.

    * It does acknowledge the existence of no-APC OA through repositories, or #GreenOA. But it falsely suggests that green OA must be embargoed. Just to give one notable set of counter-examples, all the federal OA policies in the US require unembargoed green OA.

    #ScholComm

  36. #CancerResearchUK will stop paying #APCs for funded researchers.
    news.cancerresearchuk.org/2026

    PS. So far, so good. There are strong reasons to move away from APCs. For a summary, see Recommendation 3 of the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement in 2022. (Disclosure: I was the lead author.)
    budapestopenaccessinitiative.o

    Unfortunately the Cancer Research UK announcement is marred by several false assertions and assumptions about #OpenAccess.

    * Its narrow decision is to stop funding APCs, but its headline is that it will stop funding OA publishing as such. It leaves the distinct false impression that all OA journals charge APCs.

    * Deep in the text it says that OA "hasn't worked. At least not in its current form." That looks like a recognition that not all OA depends on APCs. But it isn't explicit and didn't prevent careless language elsewhere in the statement.

    * It never acknowledges that no-APC OA (#DiamondOA) journals exist, let alone that they constitute the majority of OA journals.

    * It does acknowledge the existence of no-APC OA through repositories, or #GreenOA. But it falsely suggests that green OA must be embargoed. Just to give one notable set of counter-examples, all the federal OA policies in the US require unembargoed green OA.

    #ScholComm

  37. #CancerResearchUK will stop paying #APCs for funded researchers.
    news.cancerresearchuk.org/2026

    PS. So far, so good. There are strong reasons to move away from APCs. For a summary, see Recommendation 3 of the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement in 2022. (Disclosure: I was the lead author.)
    budapestopenaccessinitiative.o

    Unfortunately the Cancer Research UK announcement is marred by several false assertions and assumptions about #OpenAccess.

    * Its narrow decision is to stop funding APCs, but its headline is that it will stop funding OA publishing as such. It leaves the distinct false impression that all OA journals charge APCs.

    * Deep in the text it says that OA "hasn't worked. At least not in its current form." That looks like a recognition that not all OA depends on APCs. But it isn't explicit and didn't prevent careless language elsewhere in the statement.

    * It never acknowledges that no-APC OA (#DiamondOA) journals exist, let alone that they constitute the majority of OA journals.

    * It does acknowledge the existence of no-APC OA through repositories, or #GreenOA. But it falsely suggests that green OA must be embargoed. Just to give one notable set of counter-examples, all the federal OA policies in the US require unembargoed green OA.

    #ScholComm

  38. #CancerResearchUK will stop paying #APCs for funded researchers.
    news.cancerresearchuk.org/2026

    PS. So far, so good. There are strong reasons to move away from APCs. For a summary, see Recommendation 3 of the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement in 2022. (Disclosure: I was the lead author.)
    budapestopenaccessinitiative.o

    Unfortunately the Cancer Research UK announcement is marred by several false assertions and assumptions about #OpenAccess.

    * Its narrow decision is to stop funding APCs, but its headline is that it will stop funding OA publishing as such. It leaves the distinct false impression that all OA journals charge APCs.

    * Deep in the text it says that OA "hasn't worked. At least not in its current form." That looks like a recognition that not all OA depends on APCs. But it isn't explicit and didn't prevent careless language elsewhere in the statement.

    * It never acknowledges that no-APC OA (#DiamondOA) journals exist, let alone that they constitute the majority of OA journals.

    * It does acknowledge the existence of no-APC OA through repositories, or #GreenOA. But it falsely suggests that green OA must be embargoed. Just to give one notable set of counter-examples, all the federal OA policies in the US require unembargoed green OA.

    #ScholComm

  39. #CancerResearchUK will stop paying #APCs for funded researchers.
    news.cancerresearchuk.org/2026

    PS. So far, so good. There are strong reasons to move away from APCs. For a summary, see Recommendation 3 of the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement in 2022. (Disclosure: I was the lead author.)
    budapestopenaccessinitiative.o

    Unfortunately the Cancer Research UK announcement is marred by several false assertions and assumptions about #OpenAccess.

    * Its narrow decision is to stop funding APCs, but its headline is that it will stop funding OA publishing as such. It leaves the distinct false impression that all OA journals charge APCs.

    * Deep in the text it says that OA "hasn't worked. At least not in its current form." That looks like a recognition that not all OA depends on APCs. But it isn't explicit and didn't prevent careless language elsewhere in the statement.

    * It never acknowledges that no-APC OA (#DiamondOA) journals exist, let alone that they constitute the majority of OA journals.

    * It does acknowledge the existence of no-APC OA through repositories, or #GreenOA. But it falsely suggests that green OA must be embargoed. Just to give one notable set of counter-examples, all the federal OA policies in the US require unembargoed green OA.

    #ScholComm