Should universities accept Elsevier’s negotiation with Jisc? Who knows? It’s secret.

(Before It's News)

So I came across this tweet from Laurent Gatto, who’s head of the Computational Proteomics Unit at the University of Cambridge, UK:

My immediate reaction was not to retweet. Why? Because I am not comfortable recommending rejection (or acceptance!) of something I’ve not seen. I said so, and Laurent explained the real issue:

So I have two simple questions:

First, How can this massive spending on public money possibly be confidential? What justification can there possibly be for that? And second, how can there be meaningful discussion of the offer on the table if no-one knows what it is?

And then I remembered the classic explanation of confidentiality clauses from Elsevier’s David Tempest: “we have this level of confidentiality […] Otherwise everybody would drive down, drive down, drive drive drive”.

So my first reaction was to say that if anyone comes across a leaked copy of the draft agreement, let me know and I will link to it from this post. But I am also open to hear from anyone who thinks there is a legitimate reason, that I’ve not thought of, to enforce confidentiality. So if you have a reason, please mention it in the comments. If not, but you know where there is a leaked copy, email me privately on [email protected].

• Crunch Report | Intel Acquires Mobileye
• Reality has the same problem as we have with it
• MIT lab’s smart boots could keep astronauts on their feet
• TLP 190 Big Daddy Hoffman, Eagle Imports & Sheep Dogs
• It’s all just too awful
• The New Paleo? The Staples of Neanderthal Diets Unlocked by Looking at the Gunk in Their Teeth
• Common Tools or Ancient Advanced Technology? How Did the Egyptians Bore Through Granite?
• Levi’s and Google are making a ‘smart jacket’ for $350
• NOAA Scientist Supports Alaska Pipeline Leak Response
• Antarctic ice turns green as St. Patrick’s Day approaches