The Nature Publishing Group has responded publicly to the challenge issued on Tuesday by the University of California system over a proposed 400-percent rise in the cost of Nature and the group's other scientific journals.
In a long, strongly worded statement released to the news media on Wednesday, the publisher disputed assertions that it was unfairly increasing its prices in California's case. It accused the California Digital Library, which negotiates the UC system's subscription licenses, of sensationalism and spreading misinformation. And it said that the digital library's threat to cancel its subscriptions and organize a faculty boycott of the Nature group's journals had taken it by surprise.
"This has been a shock to us at Nature Publishing Group, in terms of the sensationalist use of data out of context, misrepresentation of NPG pricing policies, and the fact that we were under the impression we were in an ongoing confidential discussion," the publisher said in its statement. "The implication that NPG is increasing its list prices by massive amounts is entirely untrue."
The Nature group said that it has capped annual list-price increases at 7 percent and that the California system has enjoyed "a very large, unsustainable discount for many years, to the point where other subscribers, both in the United States and around the world, are subsidizing them." The publisher added that it "stands by its position that CDL is paying an unfair rate."
In the statement, the publisher sought to reassure other institutional customers that the California Digital Library's situation was unique. "We would like to confirm our ongoing commitment to cap site-license list prices for 2011," it said.
The Nature group also said its intent "has always been to reach a fair agreement" and that despite the digital library's "unwarranted actions, Nature Publishing Group will continue to do all it can to bring the world's best science to scientists around the world, hopefully working in cooperation with a more realistic CDL."
Laine Farley, the digital library's executive director, told The Chronicle that the library was preparing a response to the Nature group's statement.
[Update (6/10, 1:29 p.m., Eastern time):] The University of California has now posted a response to the Nature group's statement.
Comments
1. chedie - June 10, 2010 at 07:38 am
More than $17000 a journal is justified? Are you kidding?
2. lurkingfear - June 10, 2010 at 08:44 am
This actually seems a small price to pay considering the readership and the number of institutions involved. If it was only one University asked to pay 17000 that's one thing, but how many UC are there? 10? All but the most marginal Nature journals are very widely read and generally important venues for dissemination of research in their fields.
3. music_librarian - June 10, 2010 at 09:11 am
I wonder what percentage of their articles are authored by UC faculty?
4. etenner - June 10, 2010 at 10:43 am
NPG was caught off-guard by the CDL going public?? (I'm shocked, shocked, Rick to discover gambling...)Who are they trying to kid? I'd go public if offered a 400% increase. In negotiations with a major publisher of STM we were told by the rep that they "expect a certain revenue stream" from us. By making it cost prohibitive to cancel their journals, we can only trim budgets by cancelling the other guy's journals. Going public is the only way to end publisher's extortion of library budgets
5. commentarius - June 10, 2010 at 10:53 am
This is all theater. A customer has to make a big stink to force a seller back to the table. UC has been through this before, with Elsevier, and we all know how this is going to end: UC and NPG will reach a private compromise somewhere in the middle, the license will be renewed, and everything will go back to the way it was, with the publishers calling all the shots, until the next public crisis. Nothing ever changes, except the bottom line of libraries, which shrinks all the time around the margins to free up money to pay for the so-called indispensible stuff.
Everybody knows that there's no chance UC isn't going to renew Nature, and the idea of a faculty boycott is laughable. Faculty aren't paying any attention, and most couldn't care less whether the journals they need cost $700 or $7 million. It's not their money. But perhaps it should be.
6. peter_murray - June 10, 2010 at 11:35 am
The Nature group said that it has capped annual list-price increases at 7 percent and that the California system has enjoyed "a very large, unsustainable discount for many years...
Issues of the California-specific situation aside, isn't 7% annual growth also unsustainable? Is it defendable?
7. docakron - June 10, 2010 at 11:41 am
Numbers taken out of context don't mean much. It would be nice to see figures that show how much each faculty member is paying to view a particular journal under the ned digital models. Also, the ease of simulataneous access is a rather large benefit to researchers. I'm sure the California system is under budget pressures, but let's be a bit real here. Getting the best university president and faculty has become similar to getting the best football or basketball coach. It's not only outside factors that are causing shrinkage in library budgets.
8. sallygeneration - June 10, 2010 at 11:44 am
It's ok- UC faculty can just submit their papers while on unpaid furlough. Seriously UC- cut from the top, not from your foundation. Next you'll start denying tenure to those same professors for not having enough Nature pubs.
9. drgunn - June 11, 2010 at 03:12 pm
Let's not forget that NPG would be hurt worse if the professors decided to send their papers to Science instead. Papers submitted by UC researchers have earned NPG tens of millions, not even considering all the peer review the journals get for free. It's been compared to Fight Club Soap: http://nowviskie.org/2010/fight-club-soap/ Selling their own output back to them at a very inflated price.
@docakron - For context, compare the 7% annual increase with the rate of inflation over that period.
The issus of how the boycott will affect tenure and promotion reviews is being considered, I believe, but should get more attention.