I think part of the problem is ambiguity around the word “commercial.” Sometimes people use it to mean “for-profit” and sometimes they use it to mean “involving a product or service for sale.” By the former definition, PLOS (to take one example) is a noncommercial entity; by the latter, it’s a commercial entity. If we aren’t certain we’re all using the word to mean the same thing, the conversation is tough.

---
Rick Anderson
University Librarian
Brigham Young University
(801) 422-4301
[log in to unmask]


From: OpenCafe-l <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Hugh Jarvis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Hugh Jarvis <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 at 9:21 AM
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] European Policy Shifts


This is an interesting philosophical angle to discuss.  I suspect we have a nice audience here.



Can anyone provide an example of a publication or scholarly endeavor that is not "entangled" by "commercial imperatives" of some form..?



I've produced "zero budget" publications myself... but only because my university subsidized the platform they were on and I contributed my labor (which was underwritten by my day job).  And when these volunteer projects encroached on my job, or the university cut their support, I was forced to cut them back.



Artists and scholars historically have been endowed in some manner, by a benefactor, grant, independent wealth..., but I don't believe that means they were independent of any commercial imperatives.



Certainly it is possible to minimize these imperatives to allow as much scholarly freedom as possible, but I believe there is always a bottom line.



I'm not attacking Jean-Claude here.  I support their idealism, but not sure it is a reality.



Best,



Hugh Jarvis

University at Buffalo



----------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:    Tue, 5 Mar 2024 05:47:06 -0500

From:    Jean-Claude Guédon <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>

Subject: Re: European Policy Shifts



Toby,



I was not responding to the journal issue. In fact, I have the feeling we largely agree on this topic. What I was objecting to was the claim that you succeeded (whatever that meant) because you followed a commercial framework. I continue to believe that entangling commercial imperatives with knowledge production and dissemination generates too many negative distortions in the knowledge-producing processes.



Jean-Claude



On 2024-03-04 07:48, Toby Green (He - Him) wrote:

> Jean-Claude,

>

> I don’t think anecdotes can ever be established law ;-).But there are

> ~30,000 ‘anecdotes’ in Policy Commons, demonstrating that research and

> knowledge can be shared - at scale - without journals.

>
<snip...>

________________________________

Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives<https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L>

To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]

########################################################################

Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives:
https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L

To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to:
[log in to unmask]

########################################################################