Catégories
Non classé

The Role of the Academic Journal Publisher and…

The Role of the Academic Journal Publisher and Open Access Publishing Models :

« This article explores the role and value of the academic journal publisher as paradigms of Open Access gain momentum and challenge the standards of paid subscription models. To recover the costs of publication services (which include everything from printing copies to online hosting and protection of intellectual property rights), publishers have traditionally employed a model in which subscribing individuals or institutions pay for access to content. The two main versions of Open Access publishing currently at large—Gold (in which a funding body or person pays the publisher to make the content freely available) and Green (in which there are no payments made for publication and articles are archived in free public repositories)—pose a challenge to the user-pays models that have served as a foundation of the business since its inception. However, these changes do not portend an undermining of the importance or viability of the academic journal publisher. »

The academic journal-publishing industry was born in 1665, when the Royal Society in London launched the world’s first peer-reviewed journal, Philosophical Transactions. In the years since, the industry has evolved a great deal, but the role of the academic journal publisher has remained largely unchanged. We continue to perform the functions that the Royal Society envisioned so long ago: registering and date stamping new research findings across the disciplines; ensuring the highest quality through a rigorous system of peer review; disseminating material as broadly as possible so that those who require it may access it; and creating a permanent archive as a legacy for future generations. Publishers of academic journals have long played a vital role in the research process, and we believe our work will continue to be valued highly by researchers, students, practitioners, and librarians for many years to come.

Today, about 2,000 publishers—including learned societies, other not-for-profit organizations, and commercial enterprises—produce more than 25,000 journals across the disciplines (Ware and Mabe 2009). The journal-publishing enterprise is a complex one that requires significant expertise and resources. For each of the 1.5 million journal articles which appear each year, publishers manage a complex process of peer review, including the appointing and relationship management of editorial boards; the licensing of editorial office workflow systems; strategic development and branding; the copyediting and formatting of papers for both print and electronic production; print manufacture, mailing, and warehousing; enhanced electronic features such as linking and citation metrics; the facilitation of discovery and access, involving highly sophisticated and expensive online platforms; and a range of other activities which ensure quality, consistency, authority, stewardship, and the protection of the author’s and the publisher’s intellectual property rights. Much of this work requires specialized training and/or education, and our industry employs about 110,000 people globally in a range of roles (Ware and Mabe 2009). Publishers also invest heavily in supporting the editorial process and in developing new systems and technologies which aid in preparing and disseminating research material. Collectively, we have invested more than $3.5 billion in online publishing technology alone since the year 2000 (Taylor, Russell and Mabe 2010).

For many decades, journal publishers recovered costs via a subscription model, in which libraries and/or individuals purchased access (originally print copies and increasingly a combination of print and online access) to the journals. The Internet and the new communication tools which have resulted from it have allowed us to experiment with and develop a range of new models for getting the content we publish into the hands of people who wish to have it. Over the past 15–20 years, the combination of investments in technology (by publishers as well as others), and the formation of library purchasing consortia around the world (assisted by publishers, in many cases), has significantly and cost-effectively accelerated and broadened access to, and usage of, journal articles (see, for example, RIN (2009a), which shows that, in the UK, full-text article downloads more than doubled between the academic years 2003–04 and 2006–07, with a compound annual growth rate of 21.7% and with the cost of access falling to about 80 pence per article). Publishers and philanthropic organizations have also formed partnerships which have allowed for free or very low-cost access to academic journals in the developing world, meaning that more researchers and practitioners in these areas now have access to the most current research findings (see www.research4life.org/about.html). A key feature of the subscription model which has existed for so many years is that it has provided publishers with a reliable way to recover costs and earn a profit (or, for not-for-profit publishers, a surplus) that can be reinvested in the business. »

URL : http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2012.00495.x/full

Catégories
Non classé

The Case for Open Access Publishing This…

The Case for Open Access Publishing :

« This article presents some of the main efficiency and fairness arguments in favor of open access publishing. It discusses how general open access could affect research and editorial practice. It ends with a discussion of the feasibility of open access and how a move to open access publishing could happen.

This article contains a discussion of some of the core issues related to the economics of open access journal publishing. By “open access,” I refer to full open access, which simply means that all published academic articles of a particular journal are available for download by anyone over the Internet free of charge. In this limited space, I primarily cover issues where I think I have something to say. The article contains a mix of my personal views as an academic, as an economist, and as an editor of a minor open access journal.

The issues I raise relate both to economic efficiency and to fairness. I will point to the general benefits of open access and in particular to the distribution to poor countries. I base the discussion on my own experience in publishing an open access journal. I end the discussion by some thoughts on the realism and feasibility of a general transition to open access. My experience is primarily from economics, but clearly, it has some relevance for other social science disciplines as well as for the humanities. I think, however, that the issue of open access in disciplines such as medicine, where commercial interests are much more important, has to be approached differently. For readers who want to go deeper into the various aspects of the economics of open access publishing, I recommend the two symposia in Economic Analysis and Policy (2009) and in Nature (2004) and a report on the costs and benefits of open access publishing (Houghton et al. 2009). All these are appropriately available online, free of charge. »

URL : http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2012.00490.x/full

Catégories
Non classé

Kontext Open Access Creative Commons Dieser Artikel…

Kontext Open Access: Creative Commons :

« Dieser Artikel soll die sechs verschiedenen Creative Commons Lizenzen erläutern und ihre Bedeutung im Rahmen des wissenschaftlichen Publizierens und des Open Access erklären (CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, CC-BY-NC, CC-BY-ND, CC-BYNC-SA, CC-BY-NC-ND). »

« The article explains the six different Creative Commons licenses and illustrates their significance in the field of scientific publishing and Open Access (CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, CC-BY-NC, CC-BY-ND, CC-BY-NC-SA, CC-BY-NC-ND). »

URL : http://hdl.handle.net/10760/17625

Catégories
Non classé

Citation of Open Access Resources by African Researchers…

Citation of Open Access Resources by African Researchers in Corrosion Chemistry :

« The authors performed a citation analysis of 15 source papers that were written in the field of corrosion chemistry. Each of the source papers was written on the specific topic of the corrosion of mild steel. The researchers were from a variety of different countries, including China, Egypt, Germany, India, Lesotho, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, and the United States. The authors found that articles that had one or more researchers from an African country cited works that had versions in the Open Access (OA) domain twice as often (12.2%) when compared to articles that did not have an author from Africa (5.5%). The authors also evaluated the types of Open Access resources that the researchers cited, and the error rates found within their citations. »

URL : http://hdl.handle.net/10760/17568

Catégories
Non classé

Supporting Open Access nationwide To support Croatian…

Supporting Open Access nationwide :

« To support Croatian scholarly publishing environment, and inspired by global open access movement, the portal of Croatian scientific journals HRČAK (http://hrcak.srce.hr) was introduced in 2006 offering an open access publishing platform for Croatian journals. Today, HRČAK gathers about 290 scholarly and professional Croatian journals. This paper is focused on the currency and visibility of the journals included in HRČAK, giving accurate statistical data about HRČAK repository, its growth and development. Collaboration with Croatian publishers, namely those are mainly academic and research institutions or professional societies, on the continuous work of raising the quality of Croatian scientific journals is presented in this paper. HRČAK journals are available for harvesting using OAI-PMH protocol and papers are distributed through many different repositories, archives, databases and search engines. The future plans include work on full-text documents, inclusion of the additional types of publications and formats, harvesting process improvements, additional functionalities and standardization. »

URL : http://bib.irb.hr/prikazi-rad?&lang=EN&rad=591272

Catégories
EN

Open by default: a proposed copyright license and waiver agreement for open access research and data in peer-reviewed journals

Copyright and licensing of scientific data, internationally, are complex and present legal barriers to data sharing, integration and reuse, and therefore restrict the most efficient transfer and discovery of scientific knowledge. Much data are included within scientific journal articles, their published tables, additional files (supplementary material) and reference lists. However, these data are usually published under licenses which are not appropriate for data.

Creative Commons CC0 is an appropriate and increasingly accepted method for dedicating data to the public domain, to enable data reuse with the minimum of restrictions. BioMed Central is committed to working towards implementation of open data-compliant licensing in its publications. Here we detail a protocol for implementing a combined Creative Commons Attribution license (for copyrightable material) and Creative Commons CC0 waiver (for data) agreement for content published in peer-reviewed open access journals.

We explain the differences between legal requirements for attribution in copyright, and cultural requirements in scholarship for giving individuals credit for their work through citation. We argue that publishing data in scientific journals under CC0 will have numerous benefits for individuals and society, and yet will have minimal implications for authors and minimal impact on current publishing and research workflows.

We provide practical examples and definitions of data types, such as XML and tabular data, and specific secondary use cases for published data, including text mining, reproducible research, and open bibliography. We believe this proposed change to the current copyright and licensing structure in science publishing will help clarify what users — people and machines — of the published literature can do, legally, with journal articles and make research using the published literature more efficient.

We further believe this model could be adopted across multiple publishers, and invite comment on this article from all stakeholders in scientific research.

URL : http://www.biomedcentral.com/1756-0500/5/494/abstract

Catégories
Non classé

Copyright and the Harvard Open Access Mandate …

Copyright and the Harvard Open Access Mandate :

« Open access proponents argue that scholars are far more likely to make their articles freely available online if they are required to do so by their university or funding institution. Therefore, if the open access movement is to achieve anything close to its goal of seeing all scholarly articles freely available online, mandates will likely play a significant role. In 2008, the Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences adopted a policy that purports not only to require scholars to deposit their works in open access repositories, but also to grant the university nonexclusive copyright licenses to archive and publicly distribute all faculty-produced scholarly articles. A number of other American universities have since adopted similar policies. The principal aim of this Article is to analyze the legal effect of these Harvard-style open access “permission” mandates.

By invoking copyright law terminology in permission mandates, schools might intend that they have the legal effect of transferring nonexclusive rights to the school, thereby clarifying and fortifying the school’s rights to reproduce and publicly disseminate faculty works. However, the legal effect of these mandates is uncertain for several reasons. First, it is unsettled whether scholars or their university employers are the authors and initial owners of scholarly articles under U.S. copyright law’s work-made-for-hire rules, which vest authorship and copyright ownership in the employer for works created by employees within the scope of employment. Second, the mandates are broad university policies that purport to grant the university nonexclusive copyright licenses in every scholarly article unless a faculty member affirmatively opts out on a per-article basis. Are the policies specific enough to provide the essential terms of the grant? Furthermore, can the mere adoption of a school policy, without some additional affirmative act by the author, effectuate such a grant without unduly encroaching upon the author’s autonomy interests? Lastly, even if the policies effectuate nonexclusive license grants, will the licenses survive after the author transfers copyright ownership to a journal publisher as per common practice? Section 205(e) of the Copyright Act provides that a prior nonexclusive license evidenced in a writing signed by the right holder prevails over a subsequent conflicting transfer of copyright ownership, so the answer appears to turn on whether permission mandates satisfy the requirements of § 205(e).

This Article argues that permission mandates can create legally enforceable, durable nonexclusive licenses. First, it argues that although there are important justifications, including academic freedom concerns, for recognizing the controversial “teacher exception” to the work for hire rules for scholarly articles, such an exception may be unnecessary because a strong argument also exists that much scholarship is produced outside the scope of employment for work for hire purposes. Second, it argues that permission mandates provide sufficient evidence of the grantor’s intent and the rights granted to create effective nonexclusive licenses. Third, permission mandates satisfy the requirements of § 205(e) and establish the license’s priority over the subsequent transfer of copyright ownership largely because they fulfill the underlying purposes of § 205(e) by providing sufficient evidence and notice of the license to potential copyright transferees (typically academic publishers). In reaching these conclusions, this Article emphasizes that Courts should consider the uniformity costs (social costs resulting from applying uniform rules and granting uniform entitlements across diverse conditions) that arise from applying to scholarly articles copyright rules developed to address proprietary models of information production. Applying the relevant copyright rules in a manner sensitive to the nonmarket nature of scholarly production is the most effective way to reduce these social costs, and reinforces the conclusion that mandate licenses are enforceable.

Lastly, the Article considers whether the opt-out nature of permission mandates offends notions of authorial autonomy in copyright. It compares permission mandates with another high profile opt-out licensing regime: the proposed Google Books settlement agreement, which the court rejected partly because of authorial autonomy concerns. Authorial autonomy is far less of a concern for scholarly articles than for the books at issue in the Google Books case, however, due to the nonmarket nature of scholarly article production coupled with academic community norms. Accordingly, it does not substantially interfere with authors’ autonomy interests to find that the opt-out structure of permission mandates creates valid nonexclusive licenses in universities. »

URL : http://ssrn.com/abstract=1890467