Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Scholarly Open Access
Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Alsee

$
0
0

“What is the difference between:
1. the ‘Copyright transfer’ of ‘Infonomics society’ (in your list)
and
2. the Copyright conditions of the prestigious ‘Taylor and Francis’”

I’m not a copyright lawyer, but I have studied these legalities in depth. Copyright law is complex and there are a million details that could affect any specific situation, so I’m going to oversimplify things and try to stick to plain English.

‘Infonomics society’ requires that you give them ownership of the copyright, basically giving them absolute ownership of the paper. This means THEY can sue YOU for doing stuff with the paper you wrote. They then say they will PERMIT you to use THEIR paper (the one you wrote) own paper in a few ways (such as using your own paper in a course you’re teaching). However that permission comes with conditions and it’s very vague and very limited. If you screw up, or if they dislike what you’re doing, they can sue you into oblivion. In the last several years copyright law has been strengthened into an extremely potent weapon, and you really do not want to be on the receiving end of a copyright lawsuit. The fact that you wrote the paper is NOT going save you.

‘Taylor and Francis’ gives you a choice. One option is that you keep ownership of the paper you wrote, and in essence you merely promise never to sue them for publishing it. You can do basically anything you like with your paper and no one can sue you for anything. You’re safe. The only possible downside here is if someone else publishes your paper without permission then you are the one who’d have to hire a lawyer to sue them for it (and you’re the one who gets the $$$ award when you win in court).

‘Taylor and Francis’ also gives you the option of transferring the copyright to them, meaning their legal staff goes after anyone who illegally copies the paper. If you do give them the copyright, their terms put a lot of effort protecting you. They give much broader terms saying you can still use the paper you wrote in ways you’d expect to be able to still use it. But more fundamentally you know they won’t use the copyright to screw you over because if they did that then other authors would simply stop selecting this option.


Comment on LIST OF INDIVIDUAL JOURNALS by Academic scam (on bogus/fake research publications) | Budianto "EonStrife" Tandianus

Comment on The Epitome of Predatory Publishers by jsalassi3344

$
0
0

As an up and coming researcher I found this blog to be EXTREMELY useful. Thank you for all that you do and keep up the good work.

Comment on LIST OF INDIVIDUAL JOURNALS by For Scientists, an Exploding World of Pseudo-Academia « Xenophilia (True Strange Stuff)

$
0
0

[...] Beall, a research librarian at the University of Colorado in Denver, has developed his own blacklist of what he calls “predatory open-access journals.” There were 20 publishers on his list in 2010, [...]

Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Jeanne Adiwinata Pawitan

Comment on The Epitome of Predatory Publishers by Yiannis

$
0
0

The English word epitome can mean, according to Wictionary, “The embodiment or encapsulation of” or “A representative example.

Actually, it is an ancient greek word

Comment on David Publishing: Flipping Its Model by Scott Strednak Singer

$
0
0

You can add “Journal of Journalism and Mass Communication” to your list of publications under the David Publishers name.

Comment on LIST OF INDIVIDUAL JOURNALS by New York Times article warns academics to beware of “predatory” journal publishers | Boston Children's Hospital Library News


Comment on LIST OF PUBLISHERS by CINCO DICAS AO ESCOLHER UMA REVISTA CIENTÍFICA PARA PUBLICAR OS SEUS DADOS | Crônicas da Ciência

Comment on Hindawi’s Profit Margin is Higher than Elsevier’s by Prontito

$
0
0

Replying to John; no, I do not know why Beall keeps Hindawi “in so-called borderline”. What am I missing John?

Comment on Introducing: The World Academic Publishing by emperor

$
0
0

Keep them on the list. I also received spam. Thousands of red flags:
*the mail looked and read like a nigerian fraud
*they mentioned of a paper of mine with no connection to the journals topic whatsoever
*I have no other work related to the topic of the journal
*I found journal titles with similarities to existing journals
*there are people on the board with no qualification in the topic
*by quick googling I found a board member to be also working for sciencepublishinggroup, which is an obvious scam
*there are complete duplicates, e.g. “Optimizing Sign Placements for Crowd Evacuation
on Road Network in Case of Tsunami Alert” was already published as “Optimizing the Placement of Evacuation Signs on Road Network with Time and Casualties in Case of a Tsunami”
*…

Comment on Research by David

$
0
0

Hello Jeff,is the International journal for humanity and social science(IJHSS) a reputable journal for scientific publications.

Thank you

Comment on The Epitome of Predatory Publishers by arilab

$
0
0

Thank you for mentioning this source. I think that we should start preparing a black list of such journals. Some young colleagues may fall in the trap and pay the publications fees to Neena. Btw., I believe there is an underlying cause for the existence and growth of such pseudo-journals. The extreme use of the number of journal publications as the absolute criterium for evaluating a scientist or an institution…

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Rafał

$
0
0

@Guido: From COPE’s guidelines about retractions
“The main purpose of retractions is to correct the literature and ensure its integrity rather than to punish authors who
misbehave.”

Comment on Appeals by Fahrul Agus

$
0
0

Can You explain to me, why IISTE.ORG on the list, and how the JournalofComputing.org


Comment on Research by Jeffrey Beall

$
0
0

Whenever possible, I list by publisher rather than by individual journal. In this case, the publisher is Centre for Promoting Ideas (CPI), USA, and that publisher is indeed on the list. Thanks.

Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by Robin Somes

$
0
0

Just read about the list in the NYT yesterday – an excellent resource, that suddenly clarifies the bombardment of requests for submissions I’ve had from SCIRP. The paper that prompted my deluge? A minor piece, to which my main contribution was proof-reading…

Comment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd edition) by joy macdermid

$
0
0

I continue to be surprised that Open Orthopedics is included on this list by a global inclusion of all Bentham open journals. That journal has an editorial board ( i know as I am on it), rejects papers ( i know I have had papers rejected), does formal peer review( i know i have done it) and is listed in PubMed as it says. The website could use work but otherwise it a fair journal and DOES NOT fit your published criteria for predatory journals

Joy C MacDermid PhD

Comment on Scholarly Journals for Winos by Improbable Research » Blog Archive » The oddly named Wyno academic journals

$
0
0

[...] The oddly named Wyno academic journals, many of which seem not to exist (or at least were not easily evident on the publisher’s web site) are not universally admired. [...]

Comment on Research by F. Bistouni

$
0
0

Hi
Mr. Jeffrey International journal of research in computer science (ijorcs.org) is removed from your list. What is the reason?

Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live


Latest Images