[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Deposit Mandates as part of Publisher Services
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: RE: Deposit Mandates as part of Publisher Services
- From: Ann Okerson <ann.okerson@yale.edu>
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 23:36:27 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Paul, I believe those (below) are author charges for immediate OA via "open choice" type arrangements, rather than fees to submit articles to NIH to comply with the 12-month mandate?
To my inquiry the other day to the list about which publishers are planning to submit to NIH as part of their regular publishing services, I've heard already from about half a dozen who are lined up to do this, some larger, some smaller. I've heard from others (society publishers) that they are trying to work with NIH to submit articles, but it seems as if the NIH is not smoothing the way, for various reasons. Only one publisher so far will levy a (miniscule) service fee for submission to various mandating agencies.
Right now we have a kind of mess that needs time to sort out: trying to achieve compliance for literally thousands of authors and articles in a couple of months (since the mandate was announced in January) is a herculean task, when the institutional underpinnings (the list of these is substantial) are mostly not yet present. We have a situation in which articles can be submitted by (1) authors, many of whom would rather just have someone else do it, like the publishers -- btw, the NIH instructions for authors are not as helpful as they could be; (2) the research institutions, i.e., the ones that already have everything in place to do so; or (3) the publishers. The potential for redundancy is huge and it is wasteful. The publishers, most of whom are willing to help if given half a chance, are the ones with the redacted articles... seem like the most logical funnel to the NIH, if this can be worked out.
Wouldn't it be good if the NIH, the publishers, and the research institutions would get into a room together and thrash this all out in an sensible way? Ann Okerson
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Gherman, Paul wrote:
At Vanderbilt, our Medical Library has been doing significant work contacting publishers to find out what their policy and procedures are. One discovery is that some of them intend to charge authors between $900 and $3,000 to submit articles to NIH. Some will allow for early posting, if the fee is paid.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of T Scott Plutchak
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 8:08 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu; liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Deposit Mandates as part of Publisher Services
Thank you, Ann, for suggesting this! I've been puzzling over the same thing. Might I suggest that it would also be useful if you could get samples of the messages that the publisher will send to the investigator to alert them that they need to go in to approve the submission? It'll be very helpful as we're preparing information pages for our folks if we can provide them with concrete examples of what to expect.
Scott
T. Scott Plutchak
Director, Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences
University of Alabama at Birmingham
- Prev by Date: Re: Publisher Proxy Deposit Is A Potential Trojan Horse
- Next by Date: Re: Author's Rights: Going Too Far - Or Industry Standard?
- Previous by thread: RE: Deposit Mandates as part of Publisher Services
- Next by thread: RE: Deposit Mandates as part of Publisher Services
- Index(es):