Two years after the first issue of IRRODL the Budapest Open Access Initiative coing the term (we are told) open access. You have to dig through the archives but I covered it here in OLDaily, and since then have had more than 500 posts dedicated to the topic. So how have things gone since then? In this blunt interview BOAI signatory Leslie Chan suggests that they were too focused on access, and far less focused on production, and especially with respect to whose voices are heard. I found this via Richard Poynder, who adds in his own article that “fifteen years after BOAI, legacy publishers are successfully co-opting both forms of OA outlined at the 2002 meeting… It also now seems likely that they will co-opt the reinvigorated preprint movement, and eventually colonise the entire research workflow… The crucial point here is that legacy publishers remain firmly in control of scholarly communication. Amongst other things, this means they can be expected to continue to plunder the public purse.” So, yeah, a rethink (and a reset) is required.
Source: New feed2