Is funding from Elsevier going to help sustain and technically improve SSRN? As with Mendeley, I think this is possible (unless users start massively withdrawing content from SSRN and move to another platform) 
Is the potential improvement of SSRN services what matters here? No. What matters here is that all user generated data, such as user logs and other interactions, now belong to Elsevier and are unlikely to be ever released for free. As a data scientist previously working for Mendeley, I understand the huge value of these data for building high quality value-added solutions for researchers, such as search and recommendation systems, new research evaluation metrics, social networking tools, etc. 

The whole point is that the ownership of these data sets and platforms creates better opportunities for Elsevier to build valuable solution for researchers. There is nothing wrong with Elsevier trying to build better solutions for researchers by getting access to these data sets and platforms where people are (on the contrary). We cannot be surprised they are doing this. The key problem is that by giving away the control of these systems, the academic community is again becoming reliant on one monopoly provider. By selling our infrastructure, the academic community is undermining its position to build high quality technical solutions. 

We should be debating why there was not a better solution for SSRN or Mendeley, where they could continue improving their products whilst being part of a shared open sustainable infrastructure serving all. Maybe they would have considered such an offer had it been made at the right time. 

I currently see sustainable public funding for key research infrastructure, as achieved with repositories, as the only way forward. 

Best, 

Petr


From: William Gunn <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: William Gunn <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, 18 May 2016 13:49
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [Sigmetrics] SSRN Sellout to Elsevier


On May 18, 2016 7:56 AM, "Stevan Harnad" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Of course we know exactly why Elsevier acquired SSRN (and Mendeley):

I'm not sure we do. Mendeley is looking, at this point 3 years later, like a great example of a company that was acquired & which has continued to prosper. I get the concerns; We had the same ones when Mendeley was acquired. What I said then was "wait & see". I would suggest the same approach with SSRN. 


From: Stevan Harnad <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Stevan Harnad <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, 18 May 2016 13:26
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Prophylactic Against Elsevier Predation

The worldwide distributed network of Green Institutional Repositories is by far the best prophylactic against Elsevier predation. I hope universities and research funders will be awake enough to realize this rather than falling for quick "solutions" that continue to hold their research output hostage to the increasingly predatory publishing industry. 

"We have nothing to lose but our chains..."

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Paul Walk <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
"The software may change, but you can't sell off a distributed network of independent repositories.”

I agree, and I think that this is the crucial point. The software doesn’t matter (well, it does matter, but it doesn’t affect this principle). It’s about the distribution of *control*.

We are truly fortunate to have a global, distributed infrastructure of institutional repositories which are (mostly) under institutional control. This is quite an unusual arrangement these days - and I think we should regard it as precious and inherently powerful in its denial of the possibility of “ownership” by one party.

We should do what we can to both hang on to this infrastructure, and to exploit it more fully, in pursuit of a better scholarly communications system.

Paul

> On 17 May 2016, at 22:06, Leslie Carr <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> The software may change, but you can't sell off a distributed network of independent repositories.
>
> Prof Leslie Carr
> Web Science institute
> #⃣ webscience #⃣ openaccess
>
> On 17 May 2016, at 21:35, Joachim SCHOPFEL <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Uh - "the distributed network of Green institutional repositories worldwide is not for sale"? Not so sure - the green institutional repositories can be replaced by other solutions, can't they ? Better solutions, more functionalities, more added value, more efficient, better connected to databases and gold/hybrid journals etc.
>
> ----- Mail d'origine -----
> De: Stevan Harnad <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> À: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> Envoyé: Tue, 17 May 2016 17:03:18 +0200 (CEST)
> Objet: Re: [GOAL] SSRN Sellout to Elsevier
>
> Shame on SSRN.
>
> Of course we know exactly why Elsevier acquired SSRN (and Mendeley):
>
> It's to retain their stranglehold over a domain (peer-reviewed scholarly/scientific research publishing) in which they are no longer needed, and in which they would not even have been able to gain as much as a foothold if it had been born digital, instead of being inherited as a legacy from an obsolete Gutenberg era.
>
> I don't know about Arxiv (needless centralization and its concentrated expenses are always vulnerabe to faux-benign take-overs) but what's sure is that the distributed network of Green institutional repositories worldwide  is not for sale, and that is their strength...
>
> Stevan Harnad
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Bo-Christer Björk <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> This is an interesting news item which should interest the
> readers of this list. Let's hope arXiv is not for sale.
>
> Bo-Christer Björk
>
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject:
>        Message from Mike Jensen, SSRN Chairman
> Date:   Tue, 17 May 2016 07:40:29 -0400 (EDT)
> From:   Michael C. Jensen <[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To:
>        [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> To:     [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
> [http://papers.ssrn.com/Organizations/images/ihp_ssrnlogo.png]<http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://www.ssrn.com>       [http://static.ssrn.com/Images/Header/socialnew.gif]
>
>
> Dear SSRN Authors,
>
>
> SSRN announced today that it has changed ownership. SSRN is
> joining Mendeley<https://www.mendeley.com/?signout> and Elsevier<https://www.elsevier.com>
> to coordinate our development and delivery of new products and
> services, and we look forward to our new access to data, products,
> and additional resources that this change facilitates. (See Gregg
> Gordon’s Elsevier
> Connect<https://www.elsevier.com/connect/ssrn-the-leading-social-science-and-humanities-repository-and-online-community-joins-elsevier> post)
>
>
> Like SSRN, Mendeley and Elsevier are focused on creating tools
> that enhance researcher workflow and productivity. SSRN has been
> at the forefront of on-line sharing of working papers. We are
> committed to continue our innovation and this change will enable
> that to happen more quickly. SSRN will benefit from access to the
> vast new data and resources available, including Mendeley’s
> reference management and personal library management tools, their
> new researcher profile capabilities, and social networking
> features. Importantly, we will also have new access for SSRN
> members to authoritative performance measurement tools such as
> those powered by Scopus<https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus> and
> Newsflo<http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://www.newsflo.net>
> (a global media tracking tool). In addition, SSRN, Mendeley and
> Elsevier together can cooperatively build bridges to close the
> divide between the previously separate worlds and workflows of
> working papers and published papers.
>
>
> We realize that this change may create some concerns about the
> intentions of a legacy publisher acquiring an open-access working
> paper repository. I shared this concern. But after much discussion
> about this matter and others in determining if Mendeley and
> Elsevier would be a good home for SSRN, I am convinced that they
> would be good stewards of our mission. And our copyright policies
> are not in conflict -- our policy has always been to host only
> papers that do not infringe on copyrights. I expect we will have
> some conflicts as we align our interests, but I believe those will
> be surmountable.
>
>
> Until recently I was convinced that the SSRN community was best
> served being a stand-alone entity. But in evaluating our future in
> the evolving landscape, I came to believe that SSRN would benefit
> from being more interconnected and with the resources available
> from a larger organization. For example, there is scale in systems
> administration and security, and SSRN can provide more value to
> users with access to more data and resources.
>
>
> On a personal note, it has been an honor to be involved over the
> past 25 years in the founding and growth of the SSRN website and
> the incredible community of authors, researchers and institutions
> that has made this all possible. I consider it one of my great
> accomplishments in life. The community would not have been
> successful without the commitment of so many of you who have
> contributed in so many ways. I am proud of the community we have
> created, and I invite you to continue your involvement and support
> in this effort.
>
>
> The staff at SSRN are all staying (including Gregg Gordon, CEO and
> myself), the Rochester office is still in place, it will still be
> free to upload and download papers, and we remain committed to
> “Tomorrow’s Research Today”. I look forward to and am committed to
> a successful transition and to another great 25 years for the SSRN
> community that rivals the first.
>
>
> Michael C. Jensen
>
> Founder & Chairman, SSRN
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Search
> the SSRN eLibrary<http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://papers.ssrn.com/> | Browse
> SSRN <http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/DisplayJournalBrowse.cfm> | Top
> Papers<http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/topten/topTenPapers.cfm>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> GOAL mailing list
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> [log in to unmask]
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal


_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[log in to unmask]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal