Archive for the 'Open Access' Category

House Hearing on Federally Funded Research: Examining Public Access and Scholarly Publication Interests

Posted in Legislation and Government Regulation, Open Access, Publishing, Self-Archiving on March 29th, 2012

The House Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight held a hearing today on Federally Funded Research: Examining Public Access and Scholarly Publication Interests.

Here are the documents that have been released for this hearing:

| Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography: "This work gives an outstanding overview of scholarship relating to the growing Open Access movement." — George Machovec, The Charleston Advisor 12, no. 2 (2010): 3. | Digital Scholarship |

Be Sociable, Share!

    "Will An Institutional Repository Hurt My SSRN Ranking? Calming the Faculty Fear"

    Posted in Institutional Repositories, Open Access, Self-Archiving on March 28th, 2012

    James M. Donovan and Carol A. Watson have published "Will An Institutional Repository Hurt My SSRN Ranking? Calming the Faculty Fear" in the latest issue of AALL Spectrum.

    Here's an excerpt:

    Plans for a new IR project within the law school, however, can quickly find such worthy motives swept aside as faculty members invariably voice some version of the following comments: "Won't posting my articles elsewhere steal downloads away from SSRN? That would lower my rankings in SSRN and perhaps reduce my professional stature."

    One can regret that law academics today reflexively cower at the thought of appearing to perform poorly on any new ranking system that crosses their path, no matter how dubious. Even so, there can be no denying that SSRN, or the Social Science Research Network, has earned a respectable cachet among the professoriate.

    | Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 | Digital Scholarship |

    Be Sociable, Share!

      Federal Research Public Access Act Gains 24 New Co-sponsors

      Posted in Legislation and Government Regulation, Open Access on March 20th, 2012

      The Federal Research Public Access Act has gained 24 new bipartisan co-sponsors.

      Here's an excerpt from the press release:

      The new co-sponsors. . . join the bill's original sponsors, Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA), Rep. Lacy Clay (D-MO) and Rep. Kevin Yoder (R-KS). These new supporters reflect the consistently broad and bi-partisan appeal of this policy, which would ensure that taxpayers are guaranteed free, online access to articles reporting on the results research that their tax dollars have funded.

      This issue was explored in depth at a briefing on Capitol Hill yesterday, hosted by the office of Rep. Mike Doyle. The briefing featured two expert speakers. First, Dr. Neil Thakur, Special Assistant to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Deputy Director for Extramural Research and Program Manager for the NIH Public Access Policy, presented a thorough view of that agency's experience with their landmark Public Access policy. He noted that the NIH considers public access as central to their mission, and as a critical component in ensuring that the public's investment in NIH-funded research is leveraged to its fullest.

      He was followed by Elliot Maxwell, Program Director of the Digital Connections Council of the Committee for Economic Development and author of the recent Kaufman Foundation for Entrepreneurship-funded report, "The Future of Taxpayer-Funded Research: Who Will Control Access to the Results?" Maxwell presented a synopsis of the report focusing on the potential impacts of expanding the NIH Policy to other U.S. Federal science agencies. He explored the potential benefits this expansion might have on scientific productivity, economic growth, innovation and national competitiveness.

      | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography| Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

      Be Sociable, Share!

        "The Effects of Open Access Mandates on Institutional Repositories in the UK and Germany"

        Posted in Institutional Repositories, Open Access, Self-Archiving on March 19th, 2012

        Sabine Elisabeth Puskas has self-archived her Master's dissertation, "The Effects of Open Access Mandates on Institutional Repositories in the UK and Germany," in the Loughborough University Institutional Repository.

        Here's an excerpt:

        There is evidence that institutional mandates do have effects on institutional repositories in different ways, e.g. on content deposited and service provision. The effects vary according to the characteristics of repositories and the approach taken by institutions. The research results also indicate that the experiences of institutions with a mandate and the expectations of institutions without one are almost identical across both the UK and Germany, although the developmental context of institutional repositories and institutional mandates in these two countries are very different.

        | Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 | Digital Scholarship |

        Be Sociable, Share!

          "Wait for It. . . Commons, Copyright and the Private (Re)Ordering of Scientific Publishing"

          Posted in Copyright, Open Access, Publishing on March 19th, 2012

          Jorge L. Contreras has self-archived "Wait for It. . . Commons, Copyright and the Private (Re)Ordering of Scientific Publishing" in SSRN.

          In this paper, Contreras critiques various open access strategies, and he proposes that publishers be granted one-year exclusive licenses as an alternative to these strategies.

          | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

          Be Sociable, Share!

            SAS Open Journals: Final Report

            Posted in Open Access, Scholarly Journals on March 8th, 2012

            Peter Webster has self-archived SAS Open Journals: Final Report in SAS-Space

            Here's an excerpt:

            The culture of open access journal publishing is not yet well established amongst the smaller arts and humanities journals which we intend to engage in this project in the longer term. However, as the business model for this type of small self-published journal comes under increasing pressure, SAS Open Journals now offers a lowcost solution. . . .

            The project developed a re-usable overlay journal interface, using Amicus Curiae as the exemplar, thus completing the transition of that journal from print to web. This system is now available, at minimal cost, to journals produced within the School, and to publications by cognate learned societies. The system will greatly increase open access publishing capacity in the humanities and social sciences, and further fulfil the School's RPF mission. To date, two further journals have committed themselves to using SAS Open Journals.

            | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography| Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

            Be Sociable, Share!

              Fresh from Research Works Act Defeat, Association of American Publishers and Other Publishers Oppose Federal Research Public Access Act

              Posted in Legislation and Government Regulation, Open Access, Self-Archiving on March 8th, 2012

              Eighty-one publishers have sent a letter to Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Senator Susan M. Collins, and other legislators opposing the Federal Research Public Access Act.

              Here's an excerpt from the press release:

              The 81 signatories' main points of opposition to FRPAA are:

              • It requires that final manuscripts of researchers' journal articles that explain, interpret and extensively report the results of federally-funded research—manuscripts which have undergone publishers' validation, digital enhancement, production, interoperability and distribution processes—be publicly available online, worldwide, no more than six months after publication.
              • The one-size-fits-all six-month deadline for every federal agency that funds research ignores well-known significant differences in how each research discipline discovers and uses individual articles, periods that can last several years before costs are recovered.
              • It limits where government-funded researchers may publish their work.
              • It undermines publishers' investments in new business models that currently provide unprecedented access for the public to such works for free or at modest cost.
              • At a time when Congress is looking to cut unnecessary expenses in federal government and focus budgets on priorities, FRPAA imposes additional costs on all federal agencies by requiring them to divert critical research funding to the creation and management of new databases, archives and infrastructure to handle dissemination of these articles—functions already being performed by private-sector publishers.

              The signatories are:

              • AACC International
              • Acoustical Society of America
              • American Association for Cancer Research
              • American Association for Clinical Chemistry
              • American Association of Anatomists
              • American Association of Immunologists
              • American Association of Physicists in Medicine
              • American Association of Physics Teachers
              • American Astronomical Society
              • The American Ceramic Society
              • American Chemical Society
              • American College of Chest Physicians
              • American College of Physicians
              • American Dental Association
              • American Fisheries Society
              • American Geophysical Union
              • American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
              • American Institute of Biological Sciences
              • American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)
              • American Institute of Physics Publishing
              • American Mathematical Society
              • American Meteorological Society
              • American Physiological Society
              • American Phytopathological Society
              • American Psychiatric Publishing
              • American Psychological Association
              • American Public Health Association
              • American Roentgen Ray Society
              • American Society for Investigative Pathology
              • American Society for Nutrition
              • American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers
              • American Society of Agronomy
              • American Society of Animal Science
              • American Society of Clinical Oncology
              • American Society of Hematology
              • American Society of Plant Biologists
              • APMI International
              • ARVO—Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
              • ASQ—American Society for Quality
              • Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP)
              • AVS: Science and Technology of Materials, Interfaces, and Processing
              • Biophysical Society
              • Cambridge University Press
              • Crop Science Society of America
              • Ecological Society of America
              • Elsevier
              • The Endocrine Society
              • Entomological Society of America
              • F.A. Davis Company
              • GeoScienceWorld
              • Gival Press LLC
              • The Histochemical Society
              • Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
              • IEEE
              • Institute of Food Technologists
              • International and American Associations for Dental Research
              • International Association for the Study of Pain
              • John Wiley & Sons
              • Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.
              • The McGraw-Hill Companies
              • Mycological Society of America
              • National Ground Water Association
              • The Optical Society
              • The Ornithological Council
              • The Physiological Society
              • Poultry Science Association
              • The Professional Animal Scientist
              • The Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)
              • SAE International
              • Seismological Society of America
              • SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology
              • Silverchair Science+Communications, Inc.
              • Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine
              • Society for the Study of Reproduction
              • Society of Economic Geologists, Inc.
              • Soil Science Society of America
              • Springer Publishing Company
              • Taylor & Francis
              • Thieme Publishers
              • University of the Basque Country Press
              • Walters Kluwer

              | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography| Digital Scholarship |

              Be Sociable, Share!

                "Scholarly Communication Strategies in Latin America’s Research-Intensive Universities"

                Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on March 7th, 2012

                Juan Pablo Alperin, Gustavo E. Fischman, and John Willinsky have self-archived "Scholarly Communication Strategies in Latin America's Research-Intensive Universities" in the SUSE Open Archive.

                Here's an excerpt:

                Open Access—scholarship that is "digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions" (Suber, 2011)—has dramatically changed the research landscape in universities worldwide in the twenty-first century. In Latin America, regional Open Access initiatives (if not officially labeled "open access") have permeated most research-intensive universities and national science evaluation systems and have begun to alter the way that local research is perceived. Furthermore, the prominence of Open Access, regionally and globally, has become a significant force in transforming previous traditions and systems used by universities in Latin America in the production and access to scientific knowledge, having a profound influence on its position within what might be thought of as the global knowledge exchange.

                | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography| Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

                Be Sociable, Share!

                  LITA Publishes First Open Access Issue of Information Technology and Libraries

                  Posted in E-Journals, Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on March 6th, 2012

                  The Library Information Technology Association has published the first open access issue of Information Technology and Libraries under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

                  Here's an excerpt from the "Editor's Comments":

                  Welcome to the first issue of Information Technology and Libraries (ITAL) as an open-access, e-only publication. As announced to LITA members in early January, this change in publishing model will help ensure the long-term viability of ITAL by making it more accessible, more current, more relevant, and more environmentally friendly. ITAL will continue to feature high-quality articles that have undergone a rigorous peer-review process, but it will also begin expanding content to include more case studies, commentary, and information about topics and trends of interest to the LITA community and beyond. Look for a new scope statement for ITAL shortly.

                  Of special interest to DigitalKoans readers is Abigail J. McDermott's "Copyright: Regulation Out of Line with Our Digital Reality?" article.

                  | Open Access Bibliography: Liberating Scholarly Literature with E-Prints and Open Access Journals | Digital Scholarship |

                  Be Sociable, Share!

                    Utah State Faculty Senate Passes Proposed "Retention of Authors Copyright to Scholarly Articles and Deposit in the University’s Open Access Repository" Policy

                    Posted in Author Rights, Open Access, Self-Archiving on March 6th, 2012

                    According to a library staff member, the Utah State Faculty Senate passed a proposed "Retention of Authors Copyright to Scholarly Articles and Deposit in the University's Open Access Repository" policy yesterday (see section 3:40, item 1). The policy will be sent next to the Human Resources department for further consideration since it is a proposed personnel policy.

                    Here's an excerpt:

                    (1) Author's Rights

                    The University recognizes the importance of copyright and urges faculty members to retain rights to their own scholarly articles. Therefore, if a publisher's standard contract requires the transfer of copyright and/or does not allow deposit in the University's open access repository, the University expects faculty authors to negotiate the terms of the publisher's contract by attaching an addendum to the contract asserting the author's right to retain the copyright and/or the right to deposit the published version or pre-print version of the scholarly article in the University's open access repository. Should a publisher insist on the transfer of copyright as a condition of publication or refuse to permit the deposition of the published version or preprint version of the scholarly article in the University's open access repository, it is at the faculty author's discretion whether or not to continue with the publication, which will invoke an automatic waiver to this policy (see 5.2(2)).

                    (2) Deposit in the University's Open Access Repository

                    Each faculty member grants permission to the University to post in the University's open access repository all of his or her scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles published while employed by the University. In legal terms each faculty member grants to the University a nonexclusive license to exercise any and all rights under copyright relating to each of his or her scholarly articles, in any medium, provided that the articles are not sold for profit, and to authorize others to do the same. This license in no way interferes with the rights of a faculty author as the copyright holder of the work but instead promotes a wide distribution and increased impact of the author's work. If a faculty author's attempt to retain full rights is unsuccessful, the author may proceed with publication, thereby invoking an automatic waiver for that particular article. While it is not necessary in these situations to formally request a waiver, it is recommended that the author send the bibliographic citation to the Library, alerting librarians that a waiver is being invoked and that the publication may not be posted in the University's open access repository.

                    | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

                    Be Sociable, Share!

                      "Peer-Reviewed Open Research Data: Results of a Pilot"

                      Posted in Data Curation, Open Data, and Research Data Management, Open Access, Scholarly Communication on March 4th, 2012

                      Marjan Grootveld and Jeff van Egmond have self-archived "Peer-Reviewed Open Research Data: Results of a Pilot" in E-LIS.

                      Here's an excerpt:

                      Peer review of publications is at the core of science and primarily seen as instrument for ensuring research quality. However, it is less common to value independently the quality of the underlying data as well. In the light of the "data deluge" it makes sense to extend peer review to the data itself and this way evaluate the degree to which the data are fit for re-use. This paper describes a pilot study at EASY—the electronic archive for (open) research data at our institution. In EASY, researchers can archive their data and add metadata themselves. Devoted to open access and data sharing, at the archive we are interested in further enriching these metadata with peer reviews.

                      As pilot we established a workflow where researchers who have downloaded data sets from the archive were asked to review the downloaded data set. This paper describes the details of the pilot including the findings, both quantitative and qualitative. Finally we discuss issues that need to be solved when such a pilot should be turned into structural peer review functionality of the archiving system.

                      | Digital Scholarship |

                      Be Sociable, Share!

                        "A Tale of Two Bills: The Research Works Act and Federal Research Public Access Act"

                        Posted in Legislation and Government Regulation, Open Access, Self-Archiving on March 4th, 2012

                        Peter Suber has published "A Tale of Two Bills: The Research Works Act and Federal Research Public Access Act" in the latest issue of the SPARC Open Access Newsletter.

                        Here's an excerpt:

                        (1) The Research Works Act (RWA)

                        The RWA is now dead, withdrawn by its Congressional sponsors and chief lobbyist-supporter. But here's a biography and obituary. . . .

                        (2) The Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA)

                        (2.1) FRPAA would strengthen the OA mandate at the NIH, by reducing the maximum embargo to six months, and then extend the strengthened policy to all the major agencies of the federal government. In that sense, it's the opposite of the RWA. . . .

                        (2.2) FRPAA uses the term "free online public access" without definition. But for convenience I'll say here that FRPAA requires "OA".

                        It requires agencies to come up with their own OA policies within the general guidelines laid down in the bill. It's not a one-size-fits-all solution and agencies are free to differ on the details. If the bill passes, they'll have one year to develop their policies (Section 4.a).

                        But agencies must mandate OA to agency-funded research. The must mandate OA "as soon as practicable" after publication (4.b.4), but no later than six months after publication. The guidelines do not stipulate the timing of deposits, only the timing of OA. For researchers employed and not merely funded by the federal government, FRPAA allows no embargo at all (4.c.2).

                        Like the NIH policy, FRPAA applies to the authors' peer-reviewed manuscripts (4.b.2), not to the published editions of their articles. Like the NIH policy, it allows consenting publishers to replace the peer-reviewed manuscripts with the published editions (4.b.3). It does not apply to classified research or royalty-producing work such as books (4.d.3). It also exempts patentable discoveries, but only "to the extent necessary to protect a…patent" (4.d.3).

                        Unlike the NIH policy, FRPAA doesn't specify the OA repository in which authors must deposit their manuscripts, the way the NIH specifies PubMed Central. Agencies could host their own repositories or make use of existing repositories, including the institutional repositories of their researchers. FRPAA only requires that the repositories meet certain conditions of OA, interoperability, and long-term preservation (4.b.6).

                        FRPAA and the NIH policy differ slightly in how they secure permission for the mandated OA. The NIH requires grantees to retain the non-exclusive right to authorize OA through PubMed Central. If a given publisher is not willing to allow OA on the NIH's terms, then grantees must look for another publisher. FRPAA requires agencies to "make effective use of any law or guidance relating to the creation and reservation of a Government license that provides for the reproduction, publication, release, or other uses of a final manuscript for Federal purposes" (4.c.3). The FRPAA approach gives agencies more flexibility. Agencies may use the battle-tested NIH method if they wish. They may use a federal-purpose license such as that codified in 2 CFR 215.36(a) (January 2005) if they wish. Or they may make use of "any [other] law or guidance" that would be "effective" in steering clear of infringement.

                        FRPAA does not amend copyright or patent law (4.e).

                        FRPAA applies to all unclassified research funded in whole or part (4.b.1) by agencies whose budgets for extramural research are $100 million/year or more (4.a). This includes the Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Transportation, Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Science Foundation.

                        The House and Senate versions of the bill are identical. FRPAA was introduced twice before (in 2006 and 2009-10), and is essentially identical to both previous versions. . . .

                        (2.8) Will FRPAA pass?

                        We don't know, of course. Several factors weigh against it: This is an election year. Congress is as gridlocked and incapacitated as it has ever been, even for legislation with bipartisan support. Many policy issues have a higher priority in Congress than OA.

                        But several factors boost its chances. This is FRPAA's third time around, and the first two times did a lot of the hard work in educating policy-makers about the issues. The first two times around also gathered some significant endorsements, for example, more than 120 US college and university presidents and provosts, 41 Nobel laureates, major library and public-interest organizations, and at least two non-academic, business-oriented organizations, NetCoalition and the Committee for Economic Development. The White House RFI responses are generally stronger than FRPAA; they're already public and may soon appear in Interagency Working Group reports and White House action.

                        Finally we can't overlook the RWA shipwreck and the rising tide that beached it. The same forces that brought down RWA are now refocusing on raising up FRPAA. The same forces that protect the NIH policy from repeal now want to see it strengthened and extended to other agencies. The Congressional offices which have begun to understand the issues are heartily tired of publisher misrepresentations.

                        The RWA, COMPETES Act, FRPAA, and the White House RFI can be put in roughly this order: anti, weak, strong, and stronger. Subtract anti and what do you have? Unambiguous good news. Only time will tell how good it is. And that's where you come in.

                        | Digital Scholarship |

                        Be Sociable, Share!

                          Page 30 of 100« First...1020...2829303132...405060...Last »

                          DigitalKoans

                          DigitalKoans

                          Digital Scholarship

                          Copyright © 2005-2015 by Charles W. Bailey, Jr.

                          Creative Commons License
                          This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license.