Joined by Nobel-prize winner and former NIH-director Harold Varmus, the PLoS organizers next turned their attention to starting their own journal, along the lines of the UK-based BioMed Central which has been publishing open-access scientific papers in the biological sciences in journals such as Genome Biology and the Journal of Biology since late 1999.
As a publishing company, the Public Library of Science began full operation on October 13, 2003, with the publication of a peer reviewed print and online scientific journal, entitled PLoS Biology, and have since launched six more peer-reviewed journals. The PLoS journals are what they describe as "open access content"; all content is published under the Creative Commons"attribution" license (Lawrence Lessig, of Creative Commons, is also a member of the Advisory Board). The project states (quoting the Budapest Open Access Initiative) that: "The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited."
Business model
To fund the journal, PLoS charges a publication fee to be paid by the author or the author's employer or funder. In the United States, institutions such as the National Institutes of Health and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute have pledged that recipients of their grants will be allocated funds to cover such author charges. PLoS still relies heavily on donations from foundations to cover the majority of its operating costs.[1]
One criticism of charging author-side fees is that it fails to recognize the high cost of filtering and evaluating the high number of submissions the high-impact journals receive. To maintain standards a strict review system will in general lead to a large proportion of papers that do not meet the (high) standards of a journal to be rejected for publication. Setting up and maintaining a review system requires substantial effort of both editors, editorial office and reviewers, and is hence one of the most costly elements of scientific publications.
Albanese, Andrew. "Open Access Gains with PLoS Launch: Scientists Call for Cell Press Boycott; Harvard Balks on Big Deal." Library Journal, 15 November 2003, 18-19.
Bernstein, Philip, Barbara Cohen, Catriona MacCallum, Hemai Parthasarathy, Mark Patterson, and V. Siegel. "PLOS Biology-We're Open"
Case, Mary. "The Public Library of Science." ARL: A Bimonthly Report on Research Library Issues and Actions from ARL, CNI, and SPARC, no. 215 (2001): 4. http://www.arl.org/newsltr/215/plos.html
Doyle, Helen. "Public Library of Science (PLoS): Committed to Making the World's Scientific and Medical Literature A Public Resource." ASIDIC Newsletter, no. 87 (2004): 9-10. http://www.asidic.org/meetings/newsletters/spring2004.pdf