Definitely free access but publishers will not always be in a position to provide free of charge. So some restrictions will always be there.

good question

I think it is not possible to free access of all articles as publishers may not agree free for all, but alternatively we can request personally to the authors of the articles. Also, it is easily possible in this platform.

Best wishes

Free access is important to contribute to the promotion of science from any part of the world. The way things should be organised is an open question. Hence the importance of your question

Journal publication is only a business, at least in most of the cases.

How a business can be performed by free supply of the goods?

Your contributions are very valuable and interesting. The free access democratizes knowledge. The authors of scientific articles receive only the recognition of the community, no money for this work. As occurs in other platforms, the intermediary, is the one that generates the benefit.

Well, I think either way, it's complicated. I'm someone who advocate free access to knowledge. I use Sci-Hub to get most of my articles because simply the faculty cannot establish an access to online journals. But wait? What do we really mean by "free access"? That's where the conundrum lies. If free access means that writers/authors should be read and reached for free each time someone needs an article or a book for that matter, then what about the writer's/author's own intellectual property. Isn't that too valuable to be paid for? Isn't intellectual hardwork worth the payment? I think "free access" should be alinged to the institutional dimension of state regulasation. It's the "INSTITUTION" that ought to make way for that. Take Morocco, for example, students don't have access to books and articles online. They can't buy them because, simply, most students don't get scholarships, and if they do, they wouldn't just spend two quarters of their few buckets on books. It's much more complicated when scientific research isn't institutionalised; when individual initiatives are all what it takes to conduct research.

I fully agree with your approach Aziz. The point is that the scientific field, unlike other types of cultural productions (music or cinema), does not have as a priority the "benefit" with its publications and, in general, gives the copyright to the journal (in some cases even the author has to pay a fee to the journal). In the case of books, the percentage received by the author is minimal (between 7-15%).

The model I have previously proposed for publicly funded research is along the lines of a 60%-40% rule (or other proportions) wherein some proportion is free but additional value add services (large data sets, lots of expensive figures, large paper) can be cost recovery or for profit. Having worked as an academic, research institute staff member and government scientist in investment attraction/policy/stakeholder engagement, I can say that the majority of published work is simply not available to many government types. I have many responses to this but that has been my operational experience. This situation limits the role of science in those other activities unfortunately. I have worked the US and with working visas in New Zealand, Australia and Fiji.

I agree with Aziz's point about the value of intellectual property. If it is given away for free how does the research continue? I am not employed by a university, research institute, or government, though I welcome offers of employment. I earn (limited) income from consultancy work or selling my publications personally - being paid for my knowledge and skills and for sharing with others. When we talk about free to access journals these "free" articles are paid for by the research institution or by the researcher personally which limits publication to those who have funding. Journals that pay for access to articles allow articles to be published on merit not ability to pay for publication. Perhaps on-line sharing such as Research Gate is a way to share information without cost to the reader while serving as a marketing tool for the researcher.

First principle is that we should all have access to published material.

So how do we compensate the journal publishers and the author(s) of work we consult?

Journal publishers are sometimes paid to publish and still charge an access fee. Not reasonable in my view, it inhibits access.

Publishers who don't require payment-to-publish are entitled to payment for their efforts maintaining their stock of papers and granting access 24/7.

Authors of published work are morally entitled to some recompense, even if they have agreed with the publisher to collect no royalties. However, worthy articles are frequently associated with a learning institution and contribute in many ways to articles. Should they not be entitled to something?

Lastly, what sort of payment should be offered? Cash, recognition or something "in kind"?

I can't see a perfect answer. But I would like to see a lower charge in cases where a price is charged for an article. Charging say, AU$35 is a bit much for most students, some will baulk at $5.

How about as part of the fee structure, a component is credited to the students "account" and a deduction made each time the student accesses a pay-walled article? That might help, but that may also trigger many free articles to be pay-for-view.

Sebagai seorang peneliti harus diberi akses seluas-luasnya. Sedangkan hasil penelian harus ada harganya. Karena hasil penelitian merupakan sumber informasi dan data

In response to this questions, I should like to ask: to what extent is access to these material democratised so that organisations (such as SCI-HUB) do not attempt to generate databases and make them available for free?