But it’s still not at all obvious why academic journals cost so much.
Sure it is. Subscriptions are mostly paid for by institutions, rather than individuals. Any given article effectively has a monopoly on it’s own content, so once a university has subscribed and the profs are used to getting free access to that content, it’s politically difficult for the university to un-subscribe. Then the journal incrementally increases the prices. Soon, the university’s accounting department is on the losing end of a frog-boil.
Sure it is. Subscriptions are mostly paid for by institutions, rather than individuals. Any given article effectively has a monopoly on it’s own content, so once a university has subscribed and the profs are used to getting free access to that content, it’s politically difficult for the university to un-subscribe. Then the journal incrementally increases the prices. Soon, the university’s accounting department is on the losing end of a frog-boil.
I’m stealing this expression.
I’m going to use “frog-boiler” as an insult.
The more widely-accepted term for nondestructive appropriation of creative content is ‘piracy.’
Vocabulary is not creative content.
Vocabulary absolutely can be creative content—boiling something down to a few words is a difficult art.
I would agree with it not being covered by various intellectual property laws.
-- Peter da Silva
We have no disagreement here.
It’s not one I accept. I think it’s a very bad analogy, and refuse to use the word with that meaning.
How about, I’ll use it fairly with attribution where possible
Are you going to let that frog-boiler intimidate you?
I just want to call someone a frog-boiler.