Re: 2.0K vs. 0.2K

From: Arthur Smith <apsmith_at_APS.ORG>
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 15:27:10 -0400

On Wed, 12 May 1999 13:10:27 -0400, Thomas J. Walker <tjw_at_GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU> wrote:

>I submit that APA

S, not A!!! It's!

> would be more fiscally responsible and be doing more for
>facilitating the transition from the current user-pays system to a future
>author-pays system by charging for the service of putting the refereed,
>formatted, archived versions of articles on xxx immediately upon

My argument here has been that fiscal responsibility, unless we go to
a different copyright licensing scheme, seems to require a large
charge (up to $1500) to cover our first-copy costs, but such a large
fee is not likely to facilitate any transition. Maybe we could get away
with a smaller charge at first, but if it was taken up in any significant
numbers then we really would be subject to various threats to subscription
revenues. Unless we could somehow distinguish between the PDF version or
whatever is posted to xxx and the other versions (XML, perhaps) we make
available. There may be a way to do this that makes sense, but I don't
see it there yet.

  Arthur (
Received on Wed Feb 10 1999 - 19:17:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:45:32 GMT