SPARC has released Sustainability of Open Access Services—Report Phase 3: The Collective Provision of Open Access Resources.

Here's an excerpt:

This report is the third in a series which examines issues relating to the economic sustainability of critical infrastructure services that support the operation and growth of open-access dissemination of scholarly and scientific research. This report is intended to guide funders and project planners in constructing and coordinating collective funding models capable of supporting open-access infrastructure resources. The report:

• reviews the fundamentals of robust sustainability modeling (Section 2);
• outlines the economic and institutional issues that confront those seeking to sustain free infrastructure services and discusses the implications of free models for an initiative's ability to provide an optimal level of service (Section 3); and
• identifies strategies for overcoming institutional free ridership in the design of funding models and describes practical mechanisms for coordinating the collective provision of infrastructure services (Section 4).

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap |

Thomas Eger, Marc Scheufen, and Daniel Meierrieks have self-archived "The Determinants of Open Access Publishing: Survey Evidence from Germany" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

We discuss the results of a survey conducted in fall 2012 and covering 2,151 researchers in Germany. We show that there are significant differences between the scientific disciplines with respect to researcher's awareness of and experience with both open access (OA) journals and self-archiving. Our results reveal that the relevance of OA within a discipline may explain why researchers from particular disciplines do (not) publish OA. Besides, several aspects like copyright law, age, profession or the inherent reward system of a discipline play a role. As a consequence, the paper emphasizes that a "one-size-fits-all" approach as promoted by most recent policy approaches is little promising for providing an effective framework for shaping the future of scholarly publishing.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap |

The Public Knowledge Project has released the Open Monograph Press, Release 1.0.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

OMP is designed to assist university presses, learned societies, and scholar-publishers interested in publishing scholarly books in print-on-demand and multiple electronic formats, whether on an open access or purchase basis. OMP is intended to:

• Handle edited volumes, with different authors for each chapter;
• Involve editors, authors, reviewers, designers, indexers, and others in book production;
• See submission through multiple rounds of both internal and external reviews;
• Utilize industry standard ONIX for bookseller metadata requirements (e.g., Amazon);
• Create document libraries for submissions, recording contracts, permissions, etc.;
• Handle thumbnail covers in Catalog, as well as Spotlight features; and
• Enable Series Editors to see books through review to publication.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap |

Jan Erik Frantsvåg has published "Researcher, Beware!" in the latest issue of ScieCom info (note: PDFs are in English).

Here's an excerpt:

The Wellcome Trust has not only showed themselves willing to fund OA, they also demand something in return for their funding. Authors are not allowed to use articles that should have been OA, but aren't, in their list of publication when applying for new grants. If the Trust find papers in reports, that do not comply with the OA policy, funding will be withheld. Non-compliant papers will also result in funding renewals or new grants being held back. . . .

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has announced chances to their procedures regarding OA compliance. If non-compliant papers are found in project reports, further payments will be withheld pending evidence of compliance or a satisfactory explanation. . . .

The European Union is rewriting their OA policy for Horizon 2010. In Framework Program 7 (FP7), a Special Clause 39, demanding Open Access, was attached to about 20 per cent of funds. In Horizon 2020 all funds will have an OA obligation attached. And while the OA obligation in FP7 had a "best effort" clause in it (enabling you to be let off the hook, if you could document that you had asked for, but been denied, permission to self-archive), Horizon 2020 leaves no escape. If you don't comply, you have not fulfilled your contract. This will lead to funds being withheld.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap |

The University of Rhode Island has adopted an open access policy.

This year, Amherst College, the College of Wooster, Connecticut College, the University of North Carolina at Greensboro Library Faculty, and Wellesley College have all adopted open access policies.

(See Peter Suber's Google+ announcements of these policies.)

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap |

There have been several reports stating that the editorial board of the Journal of Library Administration has resigned. The Journal of Library Administration is published by Taylor & Francis, which publishes a number of library and information science journals.

Here's an excerpt from Brian Mathews's "So I'm Editing This Journal Issue and . . ." in which he quotes an e-mail from Damon Jaggars:

"The Board believes that the licensing terms in the Taylor & Francis author agreement are too restrictive and out-of-step with the expectations of authors in the LIS community."

"A large and growing number of current and potential authors to JLA have pushed back on the licensing terms included in the Taylor & Francis author agreement. Several authors have refused to publish with the journal under the current licensing terms."

"Authors find the author agreement unclear and too restrictive and have repeatedly requested some form of Creative Commons license in its place."

"After much discussion, the only alternative presented by Taylor & Francis tied a less restrictive license to a $2995 per article fee to be paid by the author. As you know, this is not a viable licensing option for authors from the LIS community who are generally not conducting research under large grants."

"Thus, the Board came to the conclusion that it is not possible to produce a quality journal under the current licensing terms offered by Taylor & Francis and chose to collectively resign."

The Editorial Board members are:

Damon Jaggars (Editor)
Kristin Antelman
Chris Bourg
Lisa German
Fred M. Heath
Paula T. Kaufman
Deanna B. Marcum
Sarah C. Michalak
James G. Neal
Ann J. Wolpert
Makoto Nakamoto
Stephen Town

Read more about it at "Editorial Board Resigns from T&F Journal to Protest Restrictive Licensing," "The Journal of Library Administration," and "My Short Stint on the JLA Editorial Board."

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap |

SPARC has released Implementing an Open Data Policy: A Primer for Research Funders.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

This primer addresses key issues that these organizations encounter when considering the adoption and implementation of an open data policy. The guide covers big-picture topics such as how to decide on the range of activities an open data policy should cover. It also delves into areas of very specific concern, such as options for where data can be deposited, and how privacy and other concerns can be managed.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Sitemap |

Clark D. Asay has self-archived "A Case for the Public Domain" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

Over the past several decades open license movements have proven highly successful in the software and content worlds. . . . This Article argues that this IP-based approach, while perhaps helpful in the beginning, is no longer necessary and in fact prevents the movements from reaching their full potential. The IP-based approach has this effect by causing significant transaction costs without offsetting benefits, resulting in a tragedy of the anti-commons. The IP-based approach also creates the risk of IP trolls in the future, especially in the copyright sphere. . . . The Article then examines the benefits of a public domain approach and argues that such an approach would reduce the wasteful transaction costs, limit the possibility of IP trolls, still satisfy the purposes of those that contribute materials under open licenses, and better align with the normative tenets of such movements. To conclude, the Article assesses the merits of a "Public Domain Act" that would help address obstacles that currently exist in dedicating materials to the public domain and posits some theoretical implications relating to innovation based on the experiences of the open license movements and the arguments of this Article.

| Digital Scholarship's Digital/Print Books | Digital Scholarship |

Ian Ramsay has self-archived "SSRN and Law Journals—Rivals or Allies?" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

The author identifies and evaluates the respective merits of publication in law journals and publication on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN)—the largest open access repository for legal scholarship. This evaluation leads to the conclusion that at this stage of the evolution of law journals and SSRN, there are advantages in authors publishing both in journals and on SSRN. However, publication on SSRN can have particular advantages for authors in smaller countries.

| Reviews of Digital Scholarship Publications | Digital Scholarship |

De Gruyter has adopted the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND license for its open access content.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Effective immediately De Gruyter and Versita will be publishing all Open Access content under the uniform application of Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND. This means that publications may be copied, disseminated, and otherwise made public by users under the following conditions:

• The name of the author/copyright owner must be mentioned in the manner requested by the author/copyright owner.
• The publication and its content may not be used in its Open Access format for commercial purposes.
• The publication and its content may not be edited, modified, or otherwise changed. . . .

In 2012 De Gruyter and Versita published over 10,000 Open Access articles in some 300 journals. Since 2009 a large number of books and book chapters have also been published under the Open Access standard.

| A Look Back at 22 Years as an Open Access Publisher | Digital Scholarship |

The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research bill has been introduced in the House and the Senate.

Here's an excerpt from Peter Suber's analysis how the bill compares to the Federal Research Public Access Act :

Here's how FASTR differs from FRPAA:

• FASTR contains a provision on coordinating agency policies (4.a 2): "To the extent practicable, Federal agencies required to develop a policy…shall follow common procedures for the collection and depositing of research papers." This will reduce the burden on universities that need to comply with procedures at all the covered agencies, and should have no detrimental effect on OA. Indeed, it should improve compliance with agency OA policies.
• FASTR contains three provisions calling for libre OA or open licensing:
• • FASTR includes a new "finding" in its preamble (2.3): "the United States has a substantial interest in maximizing the impact and utility of the research it funds by enabling a wide range of reuses of the peer-reviewed literature that reports the results of such research, including by enabling computational analysis by state-of-the-art technologies."
  • FASTR includes a formatting and licensing provision (4.b.5): the versions deposited in repositories and made OA shall be distributed "in formats and under terms that enable productive reuse, including computational analysis by state-of-the-art technologies."
  • FASTR requires that the annual report from each covered agency include a statement from the agency on "whether the terms of use applicable to such research papers are effective in enabling productive reuse and computational analysis by state-of-the-art technologies" (4.f.2.B.i) and the results of the agency's "examination of whether such research papers should include a royalty-free copyright license that is available to the public and that permits the reuse of those research papers, on the condition that attribution is given to the author or authors of the research and any others designated by the copyright owner" (4.f.2.B.ii).

The Alliance for Taxpayer Access has issued a call to action to support the bill.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography (paperback, PDF file, and XHTML website; over 1,100 entries) | Digital Scholarship |

The Academy of Social Sciences has released a Professional Briefings issue that contains the presentations from its two-day Implementing Finch conference.

Here's an excerpt:

Moving to the recommendations, Dame Janet wished to correct some misunderstandings. The main recommendation was for a mixed economy including both the 'author pays' and subscription models of publishing. The report did not recommend a rapid move to Gold open access ('author pays') and anticipated a mixed economy for the foreseeable future. However the report did recommend that the policy direction should be set towards Gold open access and envisaged the balance between the two models of publishing would shift over time.

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography (paperback, PDF file, and XHTML website; over 1,100 entries) | Digital Scholarship |