University of Glasgow announces new Publications Policy
http://www.lib.gla.ac.uk/enlighten/publicationspolicy/index.html
“The University of Glasgow is proud to announce a new Publications Policy which will require authors to deposit the full text of peer reviewed journal articles and conference proceedings in the University's institutional repository Enlighten
(http://www.gla.ac.uk/enlighten ) where publisher agreements permit this . . . In joining major institutions and funding bodies worldwide the University recognises the importance of free and unrestricted access to scholarly literature in the furtherance of research; and the importance to researchers of maximising the impact of their research across the world.
Professor Steven Beaumont, OBE CEng FRSE Vice-Principal Research and Enterprise said 'The University of Glasgow generates over 3,000 research papers per year. Since we began to put these into Enlighten on a voluntary basis there have been over 1 million downloads. Enlighten really does help the University to showcase its research and to increase the impact of that it has on society. This new policy will make that impact even greater. I very much appreciate the support of Senate in adopting this move.'”

Sounds like there may be other universities that have adopted this policy, and you can be sure I'll be seeking them out! Doesn't help with previously published articles, but still . . .

It's certainly true that while JSTOR may be nonprofit, it does have to pay the academic publishers for access, and it is unreasonable to expect them to give away their product for nothing.

I'll admit that for years I "paid" for my JSTOR via my childrens' college tuition. This gave me the time to figure out other access when the last one graduated.

In the meantime, my local library sprung for the service. Had I not been so lucky, I'd happily have paid $100-$200 per year for the service. While casting around for options, I did contact JSTOR and was met with an Iron Curtain of indifference and bureaucratic indifference–they simply could not imagine a private-sector-type individual subscription service.

What is needed, then, is not "free JSTOR for the masses," which might overwhelm demand and tick off the journal presses, but rather a bit of entrepreneurial spirit and willingness to sell their services to the general public.

Best,

A happy JSTOR user

JSTOR ripped these poems off without so much as a fare-the-well to the original copyright holders, many of whom are still alive and active. Opting in or opting out was not an option extended to the "content providers." JSTOR now expects pay-per-view money from you, the viewer, if you should wish to look at one of those poems.

Meanwhile, the poet is not only shut out, but shown the door if he or she complains about infringement. It is time, indeed, to shut down JSTOR, or modify it significantly, since it is not-for-profit, and copyright infringement is a violation of federal law. Should JSTOR continue in its rapacious ways, its not-for-profit status should be revoked.

If you’ve been frustrated by finding at Google a tantalizing snippet of what looks like an invaluable article on exactly the topic you’re interested in, only to discover that it’s behind the JSTOR wall, you’ll want to read this conversation…

http://interimtom.blogspot.com/2007/05/conversation-with-jstors-bruce-heterick.html

This deserves a general campaign to open those publicallyt funded archives up to the public.

As a way to deal with this, I have developed a list of workarounds, starting with the online services of my town library, to the online resources of my state university (where state law makes a few of these databases available) to searching for a working paper version or loose pdf to the very last option– asking a friend still in academia to send me a copy.

As an independent scholar, I review for and submit to journals where I can't even access their archives, despite the work that I do 'for them'. My workarounds help a bit, but having my access to information blocked or detoured slows down my learning. I understand why the paywalls exist financially (hey, I'm a retired business school professor). And I also see how the paywalls are supported by an old-fashioned approach to knowledge workers/working. Only those in the "guild" (i.e., in university jobs) get full access, despite the fact that many knowledge workers contribute to the research in one form or another, as research participants, taxpayers, reviewers, promulgators, etc. Do we just have to wait until Google gets around to digitizing Administrative Science Quarterly? Grrrr…