Open Hardware Distribution and Documentation Working Group: Pyramids versus circles — the need for more cooperative/collaborative business models for OScH | by Journal of Open HW | Jun, 2021 | Medium

“One of the biggest challenges in scaling open science hardware is finding the right business model. It’s a topic that has come up at every GOSH event I’ve been to, and it’s something we as a community need to figure out if we hope to “make OScH ubiquitous by 2025”. I’ve been thinking about this problem deeply over the past 5 years as part of my entrepreneurial journey at Sci-Bots where I’ve been working to commercialize DropBot, an open-source digital microfluidics controller that was the product of my PhD research. Starting a business is hard even in the best-case scenario, but it can be especially difficult when the type of business you are trying to create doesn’t follow the traditional narrative….”

Open Access: Understanding the Mission, the Models, and the Mindsets

“Over the past 20 years, Open Access publishing has evolved from an aspirational idea into a widely accepted practice in scholarly communications. For those just getting started in publishing and scholarly communications, it can seem like everyone just “knows” what is meant by open access. But how OA is defined and how widely it is adopted differs among institutions, regions, and disciplines. Understanding how open access is funded, how it is operationalized, and to what extent content it is truly “open” can vary widely depending on the stakeholder—librarian, funder, publisher, or researcher. 

Attendees of this introductory workshop will learn about the history and evolution of open access, from the Budapest Open Access Initiative to Plan S, and explore the evolution from the original green and gold OA models to the latest transformative agreements and other business models.

Specifically, the workshop will cover:

Brief history of open access and its position in the broader context of Open Science
Different types of open access and how these definitions are contested
Affordances and limitations of open access
Perspectives of different stakeholders 
Approaches to funding models: transformative agreements, pure publish agreements, memberships, subventions, and micro-payments
Ways that open access may develop in the future…”

What’s Wrong with Paying for Peer Review? – The Scholarly Kitchen

“It’s also worth quantifying the additional direct costs — especially in a system that is already considered too expensive by many. In an APC world, the authors of the accepted articles cover the costs of reviewing all those other articles that get rejected. For an Open Access journal with a 25% acceptance rate and an average of 2.2 reviews per article, paying the reviewers for one article’s worth of review comes in an 2.2 * $450 = $990. The journal reviews 1/0.25 = 4 articles to find one that is publishable, and the authors of the publishable article pay the costs for reviewing the other three. So, the modest proposal of a $450 fee for each review balloons to an additional $3960 being added to the Article Processing Charge for an average journal. …”

 

Boldly growing: PLOS’ new titles and business model update for institutions

“With PLOS’ recent announcement of five new titles in April, PLOS is keen to introduce our newest titles and business model to the library community.

Join PLOS’ outreach, publishing, and partnerships teams for an introduction to these new titles and PLOS’ newest non-APC based, equity-focused business model.

You can learn more about the rationale for launching new titles on the PLOS blog: https://theplosblog.plos.org/2021/04/launching-new-journals-2021/
and recent coverage from Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01907-3

This webinar is open to libraries, consortia, and PLOS institutional partners and registration is required….”

Introducing Direct to Open – YouTube

“Direct to Open (D2O) is a sustainable framework for open access monographs and edited collections from the MIT Press. D2O moves professional and scholarly books from a solely market-based, purchase model to a collaborative, library-supported open access model. Instead of purchasing a title once for a single collection, libraries now have the opportunity to fund them one time for the world through participant fees. See how it works….”

arXiv’s membership program is now based on submissions | arXiv.org blog

“arXiv’s members have provided approximately 25% of our operating budget for the past ten years, supporting arXiv’s mission to provide a reliable open platform for sharing research. By becoming arXiv members, more than 230 institutions around the world have made a strong statement in favor of open access, open science, and sustainable academic publishing. Thank you, members!

We are happy to announce our updated membership program, which was developed in collaboration with the Membership Advisory Board. This program is part of our sustainability model, complements arXiv’s diverse funding sources, including societies and other organizations, and ensures that arXiv will have the funding required to continue meeting researchers’ evolving needs.

arXiv membership is inclusive, flexible, and offers your institution a high value, low-risk, budget-conscious option to serve your scholarly community. Members receive public recognition, institutional usage statistics, eligibility to serve in arXiv’s governance, and more….

Universities, libraries, research institutes, and laboratories are invited to join or renew. For standard memberships, annual fees are based on submissions by institution, averaged over three years….”

„Wir müssen in Fachdisziplinen denken, um mehr Titel und Programme im Open Access zu ermöglichen“ | Open Research Community

From Google’s English:  “The financing model “wbv Open Library,” which the publisher and Knowledge Unlatched have jointly launched, is oriented towards the disciplines of adult education and professional and business education. This interview is about the framework that had to be defined, about pricing, planning processes – but also about the fun it is to try something new. Your goal: to provide the funding institutions and libraries with discipline-oriented access to Open Access publications….”

Librarian Community Call: the Subscribe to Open (S2O) model

“Join us for the June OpenCon Librarian Call to discuss the Subscribe to Open (S2O) model which has been gaining traction as a sustainable and equitable open publishing model without the headache of contract negotiations. Allison Langham-Putrow, University of Minnesota and Ashley Farley, Gates Foundation will provide an overview of S2O, what you need to know as a librarian, and some of the challenges the model may face. We will leave time for questions and would love to hear your thoughts and experiences with S2O.

This call brings together all librarians working with, or learning about, all things Open–and gives folks an opportunity to connect with each other to better their work and librarianship. …”

PAPPI Public Wiki

“This wiki introduces a scoring system to evaluate publishers’ practices through the values of higher education, libraries, and learned societies. In this provisional scoring system, tentatively called Publishers Acting as Partners with Public Institutions of Higher Education & Land-grant Universities (PAPPIHELU, hereafter referred to as PAPPI), partners are publishers that focus on empowering researchers and scholars and also the institutions of higher education that support them. They see faculty, students, and institutions of higher education as essential partners, not customers, and emphasize the rights of content creators and disciplinary experts in the publishing process. PAPPI criteria evaluate how well a publisher’s practices are in synchronization with the common worldview and ethic of public and land-grant institutions of higher education and their libraries….

Credit is determined by a publisher’s score in the following main categories:

Public Access
Article Processing Charges
Copyright
Author Use
Educational Use
Business Model
Discoverability
Business Practices
Publishing Practices
Other Innovations …”

MIT Press Direct to Open (D2O) Prospectus

Direct to Open (D2O) is a new, collective action model, built to support the open access publication of digital monographs from the MIT Press. Open scholarship benefits authors, readers, and the academy at large. At the same time, the traditional, market?based business model for scholarly monographs no longer works. D2O seeks to move digital scholarly books—monographs and edited volumes—from a gated purchase model to an open community?supported approach. D2O brings libraries and the MIT Press together to open access to knowledge in a new way.