In August I blogged that Nature Publishing would be removing their confidentiality pricing clause in their license agreements. I was wrong. It turns out the sales rep was "mistaken." Rick Anderson's email on SERIALST provides a rather in depth description of his conversation with Nature's management.

While T. Scott reminded us that Nature's confidentiality pricing clause is not about fairness it is about business, Rick brings up an equally good point about public institutions who might be legally obligated to have their expenditures (as well as income) a matter of public record. How does one deal with that? Is something like that covered under the "subject to local law" language that Rick mentions is at the beginning of the Nature's confidentiality clause?

Hmmm.