Re: Self-Archiving the Refereed Journal Literature

[Stevan Harnad <harnad@ecs.soton.ac.uk>]

         ** Apologies for cross-posting **

     Original American Scientist Open Acces Forum Thread began:

     "Self-Archiving the Refereed Journal Literature" (Apr 1999)
     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/0203.html

Below is an excerpt from Peter Suber's Open Access News
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2006_08_27_fosblogarchive.html#115703264696631993
summarizing OhioLINK's very welcome recommendation to self-archive.

What is missing from the otherwise useful information that 
OhioLINK lists, curiously, is a link to the BOAI Self-Archiving 
FAQ, in place since 2002!

http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/self-faq/

And whereas it is always good to negotiate the retention of 
rights if an author can and wishes, it is erroneous to imply that 
that is a *necessary* precondition for self-archiving.

With 94% of journals already endorsing immediate (non-embargoed) 
OA self-archiving

http://romeo.eprints.org/stats.php

and the readily available option, for articles published in the 
remaining 6%, of depositing their full-texts and metadata too, 
immediately upon publication, but making only their metadata 
immediately accessible webwide, while provisionally setting 
access to their full-text as "Closed Access" during any embargo 
period:

http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/91-guid.html

Meanwhile almost-immediate, almost-OA for each individual 
would-be user can still be provided by the author on an 
individual basis, via the semi-automatic EMAIL EPRINT REQUEST 
button now being added to the principle Institutional Repository 
(IR) softwares:

https://secure.ecs.soton.ac.uk/notices/publicnotices.php?notice=902

Hence it is now possible to self-archive 100% of the final drafts 
of peer-reviewed journal articles whether or not the author can 
or wishes to successfully negotiate the retention of rights. *Do 
not wait for successful rights negotiation before self-archiving 
-- or before mandating self-archiving*. Self-archive now, for the 
sake of research impact and progress (and negotiate after, if you 
wish).

And on no account feel that you need to switch journals in order 
to do this!

Stevan Harnad

------------

Excerpt from Peter Suber's Open Access News
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2006_08_27_fosblogarchive.html#115703264696631993

     Retain the rights to self-archive and then self-archive

     OhioLINK is recommending that Ohio scholars retain the rights they need
     for self-archiving and then that they actually self-archive. From its
     important statement of recommendations (approved in May, released
     yesterday):
     http://www.ohiolink.edu/journalcrisis/intellproprecsaug06.pdf

     There is a growing national and international movement for authors
     of peer-reviewed journal articles to self-archive their work in
     repositories that are openly accessible. Open access archiving has major
     advantages over sole reliance on the traditional publishing model. It
     substantially increases all researchers' access to the research
     literature. There is strong evidence

         http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html

     that articles that are made openly accessible have substantially
     more research impact than articles that are available only through
     subscriptions and licenses....OhioLINK is building the Digital
     Resource Commons (DRC) for [the] purpose [of self-archiving by
     Ohio scholars]....

     If traditional publication policies are followed, Ohio authors will
     not retain the rights to disseminate their own works in electronic
     form....If this continues, the academic community foregoes the ability
     to maximize access and to control the economic costs of an expanding
     knowledge base which under the current system is increasingly
     unaffordable....

     1. Faculty are encouraged to publish in journals that have
     responsible assignment of rights policies. In instances where faculty
     have a choice among journals, access to scholarship will improve if they
     choose publishers that, as a matter of practice, have favorable polices
     towards author self-archiving in open access vehicles. In addition, new
     journals are emerging that publish according to full open access models.

     2. Whether as allowed by a publisher's standard author agreement or
     by amendment, authors/copyright holders must retain the NON-EXCUSIVE
     right to make their work openly accessible and to use it for their own
     non-commercial educational and research purposes. This can best be
     accomplished by retaining copyright and only granting the publisher
     first publication rights. It can also be accomplished within current
     common practice where copyright transfers to the publisher by the proper
     retention of self-archiving and use rights....

     By altering an author's agreement with a publisher certain key
     rights can be secured that will be advantageous for the author, the
     institution, and potential readers without harming the publisher....[A]n
     Author's Addendum to the publisher's agreement can be used to ensure the
     author has retained a bundle of key rights. A template to do so from
     which a final addendum can be created is attached....

     We recommend that faculty members, if the copyright owner, and
     institutions, if the copyright holder, retain author self-archiving and
     access rights in one form or another. The template illustrates the basic
     rights that should be retained. Several optional provisions are
     suggested which the author or institution can elect to incorporate. As
     noted below, a great number of publishers are receptive to author
     self-archiving rights and so a basic addendum may suffice in most
     cases....

     3. In parallel with individual author action, OhioLINK will seek to
     add a clause to its licenses with publishers in its Electronic Journal
     Center. This clause will seek to automatically provide the recommended
     self archiving and access rights to all personnel of Ohio higher
     education institutions.

     4. With the retention of rights, we strongly recommend that works in
     both Published and Unpublished works categories be deposited in the
     OhioLINK DRC or a campus repository that links to it.

Comments [by Peter Suber:.

1. There are four important things going on here. First, OhioLINK 
is encouraging Ohio scholars to retain the rights they need for 
OA archiving. Second, it's providing its own Author Addendum to 
help authors retain those rights. Third, it's adding its weight 
as the licensing agent for member institutions to persuade 
publishers to agree to these terms. (It knows that most 
publishers already agree and is focusing on the remainder.) And 
finally, it's encouraging Ohio scholars to self-archive their 
preprints and postprints in their institutional repository or in 
OhioLINK's own repository.

2. OhioLINK is a consortium of 85 academic libraries in Ohio 
representing more than 600,000 faculty, students and staff. It 
doesn't set campus policies on self-archiving, but it can 
facilitate them (by creating its own repository, by writing an 
Author Addendum, by pressuring publishers to drop permission 
barriers) and it can encourage member institutions to set policy. 
Here it is doing all that it can. It deserves all our thanks for 
that.

3. The OhioLINK Author Addendum (pp. 7-8 of the new 
recommendations) joins those already crafted by SPARC, MIT, and 
Science Commons.

Permanent link to this post Posted by Peter Suber at 8/31/2006 09:22:00
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2006_08_27_fosblogarchive.html#115703264696631993
AM.