Gerard takes on JSTOR, purt'near calls them liars Options

[thekohser]

David Gerard assesses JSTOR as a "problem that needs dealing with", and he goes on to ponder ways by which the entire "proprietary journal system" could be brought to its knees.

[lilburne]

David Gerard assesses JSTOR as a "problem that needs dealing with", and he goes on to ponder ways by which the entire "proprietary journal system" could be brought to its knees.

He could try getting academics to provide articles for WP. But didn't he tell them all to fuck off, or something?

[Milton Roe]

David Gerard assesses JSTOR as a "problem that needs dealing with", and he goes on to ponder ways by which the entire "proprietary journal system" could be brought to its knees.

He could try getting academics to provide articles for WP. But didn't he tell them all to fuck off, or something?

Yes, Gerard does indeed appear to be a "Compleat Idiot," inasmuch as there's no difference between a proprietary journal system and a proprietary any-sort-of-business. Proprietary=owner (that's what the Latin word means). All these "property=theft" advocates quickly understand the concept of "property" when it's THEIR stuff you're trying to take away from them. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif) One more example of hypocrisy.

So. What can we do to help take out the proprietary journal system?

Well, Gerard, you can start an academic journal yourself. Of course, you'd have to pay some money in capital costs, even if it was an e-journal, and then actually do some work to get it up and going. And then, would not appreciate not getting paid by the people who read the papers you publish.

I wonder (not for the first time) what the hell it is that Gerard actually does for a living?

The problem with JSTOR is not that it charges money, but that it has too little competition and is overpriced. Somebody needs to pay for article quality-control and their upkeep on database/servers, and that should be the people who read and use the articles (if they are students, then somebody needs to pay these expenses for them as a deliberate society education-fee, not socialize them wholesale into the entire society, or (even worse) decide that the providers should be screwed by ripping them off).

Right now, JSTOR's market share for the journal-access-market, is rather like the early days of Microsoft and its PC OS market share, but without NEARLY as much reason to hold on to the market share of journal-access that it still has. So far as I can tell, it merely survives through a sort of founder effect complete with early cartelization, which prevents coalition of effective alternatives. Sort of like...... Wikipedia. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif) And there are many other parallels also, such as the salaries of the non-profit JSTOR officers, and that of WMF CEO Sue Gardner. Although JSTOR people apparently make more! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif) Neener, Sue. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif) .