Authors do not suffer under open-access model

We encourage you to republish this article online and in print, it’s free under our creative commons attribution license, but please follow some simple guidelines:

You have to credit our authors.
You have to credit SciDev.Net — where possible include our logo with a link back to the original article.
You can simply run the first few lines of the article and then add: “Read the full article on SciDev.Net” containing a link back to the original article.
If you want to also take images published in this story you will need to confirm with the original source if you're licensed to use them.
The easiest way to get the article on your site is to embed the code below.

For more information view our media page and republishing guidelines.

The full article is available here as HTML.

Press Ctrl-C to copy

<div class="article-wrap">
<div id="article-introduction">
<h1>Authors do not suffer under open-access model</h1>
<h4></h4>
</div>
<br />
<br />

<div id="article-body">
<p><P>The movement towards open access to scientific literature has gathered increasing pace over the past year, partly fuelled by the launch last October of <em>PLoS Biology</em>, an open access journal produced by the Public Library of Science.</P><br />
<P>In this article, <em>PLoS Biology</em> challenges criticism that the publication fees or ‘author charges’ that it requires in order to provide free access to readers put an unfair burden on authors. Publication fees are not restricted to the open-access movement, it says, as authors regularly pay several thousands of dollars in page charges and other fees to traditional publishers.</P><br />
<P>Furthermore, the term ‘author charges’ is misleading, it says, as the fees are not borne purely by authors, but are shared by the many organisations that aim to disseminate scientific discoveries as widely as possible.</P><br />
<P><a  href="http://www.plosbiology.org/plosonline/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020105" target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/tracking/external/'+this.href);" rel="noopener noreferrer">Link to full article in <EM>PLoS Biology</EM></A> </P></p>

</div>
<div class="quick-links-wrapper">
<h3>You might also like</h3>
[related-articles]
</div>
<p>This article was originally published on <a href="https://www.scidev.net" target="_blank">SciDev.Net</a>. Read the <a href="https://www.scidev.net/global/opinions/authors-do-not-suffer-under-openaccess-model/" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
<script type="text/javascript">
(function(e,t,n,r,i,s,o){e["GoogleAnalyticsObject"]=i;e[i]=e[i]||function(){(e[i].q=e[i].q||[]).push(arguments)},e[i].l=1*new Date;s=t.createElement(n),o=t.getElementsByTagName(n)[0];s.async=1;s.src=r;o.parentNode.insertBefore(s,o)})(window,document,"script","//www.google-analytics.com/ga.js","ga");var _gaq=_gaq||[];var _gaq=_gaq||[];_gaq.push(["_setAccount","UA-3223906-8"],["_trackEvent","article interaction","republished","https://www.scidev.net/global/opinions/authors-do-not-suffer-under-openaccess-model/",null,true])
</script>
</div>

The movement towards open access to scientific literature has gathered increasing pace over the past year, partly fuelled by the launch last October of PLoS Biology, an open access journal produced by the Public Library of Science.

In this article, PLoS Biology challenges criticism that the publication fees or ‘author charges’ that it requires in order to provide free access to readers put an unfair burden on authors. Publication fees are not restricted to the open-access movement, it says, as authors regularly pay several thousands of dollars in page charges and other fees to traditional publishers.

Furthermore, the term ‘author charges’ is misleading, it says, as the fees are not borne purely by authors, but are shared by the many organisations that aim to disseminate scientific discoveries as widely as possible.

Link to full article in PLoS Biology