I hope they find a long term archival approach for the literature that’s no longer being paid for.
In CS, there was a transition from older journals to newer publishers around 1980, and much of the literature prior to that is simply inaccessible.
In CS, there was a transition from older journals to newer publishers around 1980, and much of the literature prior to that is simply inaccessible.
Other notable efforts, mostly envisioned and led by librarians, are "dark" digital archives (LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, Portico, etc) which usually have a mechanism to flip and "trigger" public access if the publisher vanishes; microfilming and other microform throughout the 20th century; Hathitrust / Google Books; and as others have mentioned, scalable and sustainable (cost-wise) off-campus depositories.
That's why academics do it. Most of them anyway. All for "free".
The most I've personally gotten was a nice note from an editor; I've heard rumors of someone who reviewed enough to get some journal-branded swag (a mug or calendar, I think). If you review a book, you might get to keep the copy.
Nobody gets cash.
That is, in fairness, three instances over what is by now probably well over 100 reviews.
Literally the copyright for scientific articles should be 1 year. This is how we fix open access.
Step one: Renegotiate the Berne Convention.
Although, full agreement if that doesn't become a problem or you have a solution for it already prepared :)
That's a strong word. Just because something is not digitized doesn't mean it's not there. Have you talked to a reference librarian? Material in archives may be inaccessible because of legal stipulations or just simply unindexed, or writings are known to exist only in manuscript - but "not online" or "in off-site storage" doesn't qualify.