Jeremy wrote:
] What do they hope to gain by this? It seems likely to
] encourage private full-text archival of NYT articles, rather
] than on-demand online retrieval. Some may be dissuaded from
] linking to NYT at all, given the short fuse, and migrate to
] other publications that don't have a similar policy.

Personally I use my local library's proxy server to access the full text of NY Times free of charge(*).

-andy

** -- Paid for by my taxes, already.

Jeremy wrote:
] The New York Times has changed its policy for online access to
] news articles older than thirty days. These articles are no
] longer available via the free registration process.

Huh? So I did a search on MemeStreams for NYT and I was able to pull up almost all of the articles that the search produced. Some are from quite some time ago. There was only one exception. One article came up as an abstract. I was asked if I want to pay $2.95 for this article. I'm not sure how NYT decides which articles to charge for, but it certainly isn't everything or even most things.

I will also say that $2.95 is WAY too much for a single article. Nor do I find their "25 article multi-pack" compelling at a dollar per article (A 65% savings! :-0 ) A complete print issue of the New York times costs far less then their "25 article multi-pack" and includes far more then 25 articles. They need to slash these prices.

However, is there a price I would live with? I'm not sure... Some good articles from NYT have been recommended here. (Complete with the ubiquitous Starbucks ad that I've seen so many times that I don't have to double check it.) I would think this would be a cause you would take up, Jeremy. In the past you have often advocated the idea that you would rather pay for web content then have to endure advertisments... You seem to be changing your position on that...

Decius wrote:
] Huh? So I did a search on MemeStreams for NYT and I was able
] to pull up almost all of the articles that the search
] produced. Some are from quite some time ago. There was only
] one exception. One article came up as an abstract.

Every NYT-authored article older than thirty days is presented only as an abstract. You have to pay on a per-article basis for the full text.

Wire stories (Reuters, AP, AFP, etc.) are still available, only because NYT is not in a position to charge for them (from an IP standpoint).

Per-item fees are not the way to go here. Subscription services are the only compelling offering, in my view. The thing is, I already have that.

Case in point: article linked in my MemeStream, 'Telecom Giants Retrench in Europe'. Following the NYT link offers the abstract, wants me to pay $3 to read it. At this point, I will just use my Lexis-Nexis subscription to retrieve the article. It's a few clicks away.

] I would think this would be a cause you would take up, Jeremy.
] In the past you have often advocated the idea that you would
] rather pay for web content then have to endure advertisments...
] You seem to be changing your position on that...

No I'm not. I've advocated a subscription model as an option in lieu of advertisements. NYT does not appear to be offering a subscription service here. If I wanted to use NYT as a research source, I would not pay $3/article for 100 articles. Give me a break. And if I'm going to spend $100 for old newspapers (ostensibly for "multi-packs"), I should be able to get whatever I want, whenever I want it.

Given that the NYT archive is already in LN, the right price point for an NYT-only archive will have to be pretty low.