A New Social Contract for Open Science in the Age of AI

The landscape of academic publishing is at a critical juncture. A recent LinkedIn post by JMIR Publications founder Gunther Eysenbach regarding the Meta lawsuit by major legacy publishers has sparked a vital conversation about the future of Open Access (OA) and the evolving role of Artificial Intelligence.

The lawsuit raises a fundamental question that extends far beyond copyright: In an era where AI models are built upon the foundation of human knowledge, how do we ensure the sustainability and integrity of the very systems that produce that knowledge?

At JMIR Publications, as a mission-driven, full Open Access publisher, we believe the answer lies not in retreating to closed models or further empowering legacy gatekeepers, but in forging a new social contract for Open Science.

The "Triple Dip" Dilemma and the Importance of True OA

The current landscape often sees authors inadvertently signing away exclusive commercialization rights to legacy publishers, even when publishing "open access." This enables a "triple dip" where publishers collect Article Processing Charges (APCs), subscription fees, and now, lucrative AI licensing fees.

This model, often facilitated by "transformative" or "read and publish" agreements, can inadvertently stifle the very openness it claims to promote. It funnels resources back into legacy systems rather than investing in the future of independent, community-driven Open Science infrastructure.

A Call to Action for Researchers and Librarians

Researchers and librarians are not just stakeholders in this ecosystem; you are its architects. Your choices and advocacy have the power to influence the trajectory of scholarly communication.

For Researchers: We encourage you to look closely at the licenses you sign. "True OA," as practiced by JMIR Publications and other fully open access publishers, ensures that you retain rights and that your work remains a public good, not a proprietary data set for commercial exploitation.

For Librarians: We invite you to rethink the long-term impact of transformative agreements. Are they truly transforming the landscape, or are they sustaining old monopolies? We advocate for a shift in funding towards:

• Independent Full OA Publishers: Supporting mission-driven organizations committed to equitable access.
• Open Science Infrastructure: Investing in repositories, provenance systems, and transparent peer-review models.
• AI-Native Open Science: Developing tools and standards that ensure AI benefits from—and contributes to—the scholarly community.

Our Stance: Towards Sustainable, AI-Native Open Science

The future is not a choice between "closed science" and "AI." It is about building an ecosystem where both can thrive. Our vision for this new social contract includes:

1. AI Accountability: AI companies that benefit from the open science infrastructure should contribute to its sustainability.
2. Evolved Attribution: Developing robust systems for provenance and attribution in the age of generative AI.
3. Protecting the Mission: Ensuring that independent, mission-driven publishers are not sidelined in the struggle between Big Tech and legacy publishing conglomerates.

The Meta lawsuit is a wake-up call. It is time to move beyond the limitations of legacy models and embrace a future where Open Science is sustainable, equitable, and AI-native.

We invite you to join us in this conversation. Let’s work together to ensure that the acceleration of human knowledge remains a collaborative, transparent, and truly open endeavor.

#OpenScience #AI #OpenAccess #ScholComm #AcademicPublishing #GenerativeAI #Libraries #ResearchImpact