If the ACM and IEEE move faster and figure out their (open access) business model quicker than Elsevier, Springer, etc. then those will be really hard pressed to catch up. By some perspective, they already look like dinosours today.

It’s worth every penny and I’d even pay a bit more if it means PLoP papers and the like would be accessible through them as well. Personally, I’d love to see the multi-thousand dollar subscription fee journals (Software: Practice and Experience) become more accessible to those working for small- to medium-sized companies.

So I think the main option for the ACM DL is to become a comprehensive service that provides information and services beyond just providing a stack of papers. Maybe they should collaborate with Citeseer/Scholar for this?

Assuming micropayments in the future, a reduced price for papers would also make one-time usage without subscription easier. $5 is probably still steep depending on where you live.

Hmm – it seems there are two separate issues here. ACM may (or may not) subsidise the DL from memberships, but you sure do have to pay to access the DL content. If there is a core of paid content, then well the DL fees for exclusive material subsidise the more widely available stuff – and the DL benefits by having a greater holding. And, I presume (I haven’t checked) that you still have to subscribe to the library to access its content — even content freely available elsewhere. That’s certainly the situation now.

I think google will point people back to the DL as its highest priority links (it should do anyway) – it indexes the library. And the first button you press will want the DL subscription.

Rather than storing things, though, which Google can do for free, the other thing the DL does is provide a level of quality control, and an imprimatur on papers that isn’t there if you just stick the things on Google or citeseer. That must be paid for by someone: either by volunteers donating their time (and trust me: this is not feasible in the long term); by readers (the current DL model); or by authors.

So, I could imagine a DL where authors can put whatever license they like on papers – perhaps even forbidding a whole bunch of uses we now take for granted – but they have to pay to get their paper in

Would you pay an extra $100 for PLOP to have your paper in the DL? or $50? or $20 (say $10 to the DL and $10 to Joe