American Institute of Physics Will Use CLOCKSS Digital Archive

The American Institute of Physics will use the CLOCKSS (Controlled Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) "dark" digital archive.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

CLOCKSS will make AIP content freely available in the event that AIP is no longer able to provide access. . . .

The CLOCKSS initiative was created in response to the growing concern that digital content purchased by libraries may not always be available due to discontinuation of an electronic journal or because of a catastrophic event. CLOCKSS creates a secure, multi-site archive of web-published content that can be tapped into to provide ongoing access to researchers worldwide, free of charge.

"Today, when over one half of all our subscriptions are online only, we owe it to our customers more than ever to provide the best security possible for their electronic products," said Mark Cassar, AIP's Acting Publisher. "Our nearly three-year-old partnership with Portico, and now our participation in the CLOCKSS initiative, solidifies this commitment."

CLOCKSS' decentralized, geographically distributed preservation strategy ensures that the digital assets of the global research community will survive intact. Additionally, it satisfies the demand for locally situated archives with 15 archive nodes planned worldwide by 2010.

“Google Book Search Settlement: Foster Competition, Escrow the Scans”

In "Google Book Search Settlement: Foster Competition, Escrow the Scans," Peter Eckersley proposes that digitized books involved in the Google Book Search Settlement Agreement be put in escrow for some period, then made freely available.

Here's an excerpt:

One good compromise might be to require that anyone who takes a blanket license (whether under the Google Book Search settlement, or under any legislation that might expand the settlement to others) must deposit a copy of the raw scans that they create with the Library of Congress or with the entity that administers the blanket license (e.g., the Books Rights Registry). After a period of years, let's say 14, the term of the Founder's Copyright, those scans should be made available at no cost to any others who take the relevant copyright licenses.

This would not only encourage market entry and competition in the online digital books arena, but would also foster innovation in the field. There's nothing that encourages digital innovation quite like access to an enormous dataset. After all, before Larry Page and Sergey Brin founded Google, they were graduate students at Stanford. They were able to build a new search engine by downloading their own copy of the web, messing around with it, and figuring our a better algorithm for querying it. New start-ups working with digital books should have the same kind of opportunity.

RoMEO Application Programmers’ Interface Version 2.4 Released

SHERPA has released version 2.4 of the RoMEO Application Programmers' Interface (API).

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The new version uses a totally new algorithm and is faster than earlier 1.x versions. It also supplies data for the fields that were missing in earlier versions—paid open access, and compliance with research funders' mandates. . . .

If you are using an older version of the prototype, we strongly recommend that you upgrade your application to use V.2.4 as soon as possible, because we will be discontinuing the old versions at the end of 2009. Version 2.4 is largely compatible with earlier versions. The main things that may require attention are: the new URL, handling the extra fields, and handling changes to the parameter and copyright fields.

“One Year (Almost) with the Open Access Authors Fund”

Andrew Waller has self-archived his "One Year (Almost) with the Open Access Authors Fund" presentation in E-LIS.

Here's the abstract:

This presentation described the origin of and policies and procedures relating to the Open Access Authors Fund at the University of Calgary. The activities of the Fund in its first year were presented and discussed. Other Open Access activities at the University of Calgary were also briefly discussed.

Costs and Benefits of Research Communication: The Dutch Situation

The SURFfoundation has released Costs and Benefits of Research Communication: The Dutch Situation.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

This study examines the costs and potential benefits of alternative models for scientific and scholarly publishing in the Netherlands. It is a follow-up of the Australian study 'Research Communication Costs, Emerging Opportunities and Benefits' (Houghton et al. 2006) and the UK/JISC study 'Economic Implications of Alternative Scholarly Publishing Models'. The Dutch study was commissioned by SURFfoundation and led by Professor John Houghton from the Centre of Strategic Economic Studies at Melbourne's Victoria University and Jos de Jonge and Marcia van Oploo of EIM Business & Policy Research in the Netherlands. . . .

The study Costs and Benefits of Research Communication: The Dutch Situation compares three publication models. The greatest advantage is offered by the Open Access model, which means that the research institution or the party financing the research pays for publication and the article is then freely accessible. Adopting this model could lead to an annual saving of EUR 133 million. Even if the Netherlands were the only country to adopt this publication model and continued to pay for licences to access periodicals, there would still be a saving of EUR 37 million.

AAP/PSP Endorses IPA/IFLA “Enhancing the Debate on Open Access” Statement

The Professional and Scholarly Publishing Division of the Association of American Publishers has endorsed the IPA/IFLA "Enhancing the Debate on Open Access" statement.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Professional and Scholarly Publishing Division of the Association of American Publishers (AAP/PSP) today expressed its support and endorsement of a joint statement on the open access debate issued by two prestigious international organizations representing publishers and librarians. Designed to bring more light and less heat to the often contentious debate surrounding open access, the statement, entitled "Enhancing the Debate on Open Access," was issued on May 20 by the International Publishers Association (IPA) and the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA). They were joined in releasing the statement by the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers.

Although the debate over open access presents a unique and important opportunity for the international publishing and library communities to explore the use of technology and new business models to meet the challenges of growing scholarly publishing output, the debate has too often been hobbled "by unnecessary polarisations and sweeping generalized statements." The IPA/IFLA statement attempts to lay out common ground for both communities so that future debate is conducted "in an open-minded way, encouraging experimentation and arguments based on empirical facts. . ."

Michael Hays (McGraw-Hill Education), chairman of the AAP/PSP Executive Council, said: "By acknowledging common ground and shared values and agreeing, among other things, that 'all assumptions surrounding open access and scholarly communications should be open to scientific scrutiny and academic debate,' this statement represents an important step forward in bringing a civility and rationality to this debate which has too often been absent. We applaud the efforts of IFLA and the IPA, and join in the spirit of open inquiry and mutual respect embodied by the statement."

PLoS Progress Report: June 2009

The Public Library of Science has released the PLoS Progress Report: June 2009.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Reading it will tell you more about our story, our success and our vision for the future through the voices of many people who have helped us to get where we are today. In it you will find:

Discussions about important questions such as:

  • Five years after entering the publishing arena, what does the PLoS financial picture tell us? How will PLoS and OA affect STM (science, technology and medical) publishing in the future?
  • Examples of PLoS articles that have really changed outcomes on the ground: for example some that have improved global health, liberated research, helped scientists advance their careers, protected privacy, unearthed fossils, accelerated science or even changed policy.
  • Many personal messages from our supporters: "The innovation of PLoS was high-quality; open-access science. The innovation of PLoS ONE in some ways, is even larger because it allows radical reorganizations of scientific knowledge, which can enable new discoveries." Dr Jesse Ausubel, Director, Program for the Human Environment, The Rockefeller University.
  • Impressive statistics about the size of the PLoS community: 13,000 peer-reviewers. 26,000 authors, 1,400 board members and millions of unique visitors in 2008.
  • Information about our diverse portfolio of journals: why each exists and what they do for the organization and the audiences that they serve.
  • The reasons why PLoS still needs the financial support of our donors: to fuel OA advocacy and fund innovation in new online tools and how you can help us.
  • Our current financial statement: posted here ahead of our 990 filing on Guidestar, a commonly used resource for financial information about non profits.
  • The team: Board of Directors, Senior Staff and Editorial Boards.

Justice Department Sends Civil Investigative Demands to Google about Google Book Search Settlement

The Justice Department has sent civil investigative demands to Google about the Google Book Search Settlement Agreement. Various state attorneys generals are also looking into the settlement.

Read more about it at "Google Book Deal Faces Growing Scrutiny," "Probe of Google Book Deal Heats Up," and "U.S. Presses Antitrust Inquiry Into Google Book Settlement."

ARL Board Passes Resolution against Nondisclosure or Confidentiality Clauses in Publisher/Vendor Agreements

The Association of Research Libraries Board of Directors has passed a resolution asking members to not sign publisher/vendor agreements that include nondisclosure or confidentiality clauses.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Board of Directors voted in support of a resolution introduced by its Scholarly Communication Steering Committee to strongly encourage ARL member libraries to refrain from signing agreements with publishers or vendors, either individually or through consortia, that include nondisclosure or confidentiality clauses. In addition, the Board encourages ARL members to share upon request from other libraries information contained in these agreements (save for trade secrets or proprietary technical details) for licensing content, licensing software or other tools, and for digitization contracts with third-party vendors. . . .

The resolution was prepared in response to the concerns of membership that, as the amount of licensed content has increased, especially through packages of publications, nondisclosure or confidentiality clauses have had a negative impact on effective negotiations. The Scholarly Communication Steering Committee took the position that an open market will result in better licensing terms. In their discussions, the committee also noted the value of encouraging research projects and other efforts to gather information about the current market and licensing terms, such as an initiative being undertaken by Ted Bergstrom, University of California, Santa Barbara, Paul Courant, University of Michigan, and Preston McAfee, Cal Tech, to acquire information on bundled site-license contracts.

Position Statement From University Press Directors on Free Access to Scholarly Journal Articles

Ten university press directors have issued a statement about free access to scholarly journal articles.

Here's an excerpt:

  1. The undersigned university press directors support the dissemination of scholarly research as broadly as possible.
  2. We support the free access to scientific, technical, and medical journal articles no later than 12 months after publication. We understand that the length of time before free release of journal articles will by necessity vary for other disciplines.
  3. We support the principle that scholarly research fully funded by governmental entities is a public good and should be treated as such. We support legislation that strengthens this principle and oppose legislation designed to weaken it.
  4. We support the archiving and free release of the final, published version of scholarly journal articles to ensure accuracy and citation reliability.
  5. We will work directly with academic libraries, governmental entities, scholarly societies, and faculty to determine appropriate strategies concerning dissemination options, including institutional repositories and national scholarly archives.

Read more about it at "10 University-Press Directors Back Free Access to Scholarly Articles."

“Deal or No Deal: What If the Google Settlement Fails?”

In "Deal or No Deal: What If the Google Settlement Fails?," Andrew Richard Albanese examines the uncertain future of the Google Book Search Settlement Agreement.

Here's an excerpt:

"This thing is going to die," one close observer of the settlement told PW [Publishers Weekly]. "Let's put it this way—with all the sketchy things in the agreement, there is no way [the parties] want people to look at this longer, rather than shorter."

Forty Percent of UK University Libraries to Cut Materials Budgets in 2009-10 Academic Year

The Times Higher Education reports that 40% of surveyed UK university libraries intend to cut journals and books from their materials budgets in the 2009-10 academic year, and a fifth expect to cut at least one "big deal" electronic journal package. (Thanks to Colin Steele.)

O’Reilly Launches Open Feedback Publishing System

O'Reilly has launched the Open Feedback Publishing System, which allows readers to comment on in-progress works.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Over the last few years, traditional publishing has been moving closer to the web and learning a lot of lessons from blogs and wikis, in particular. Today we're happy to announce another small step in that direction: our first manuscript (Programming Scala) is now available for public reading and feedback as part of our Open Feedback Publishing System. The idea is simple: improve in-progress books by engaging the community in a collaborative dialog with the authors out in the open. To do this, we followed the model of the Django Book, Real World Haskell, and Mercurial: The Definitive Guide (among others) and built a system to regularly publish the whole manuscript online as HTML with a comment box under every paragraph, sidebar, figure, and table.

“Enhancing the Debate on Open Access: A Joint Statement by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions and the International Publishers Association”

IFLA and the IPA have issued "Enhancing the Debate on Open Access: A Joint Statement by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions and the International Publishers Association."

Here's an excerpt:

IFLA and IPA share a common set of basic understandings and believe that the observance of the shared ground as set out below would enhance the overall debate.

  1. IFLA and IPA value the contribution to scholarly communication that publishers and libraries have made and believe that mutual respect is important to enhance the quality of the public discourse on open access.
  2. IFLA and IPA recognise that the concerns of academic authors must be at the heart of this debate—their scientific freedom, and their needs as researchers, teachers, authors, reviewers and users are paramount.
  3. IFLA and IPA acknowledge that the broadest possible access to scholarly communications is an important shared objective and that potential access to all research by all researchers, irrespective of geographical location or institutional affiliation is a shared aspiration of libraries and publishers.
  4. All assumptions surrounding open access and scholarly communications should be open to scientific scrutiny and academic debate. All stakeholders are encouraged to innovate, experiment and explore the new opportunities that technology brings.
  5. IFLA and IPA recognise that access must be sustainable, i.e. that economic long-term viability and long-term archiving are important elements of this debate.
  6. IFLA and IPA agree that the debate is most effective if it recognises the potential diversity of scholarly communication in different academic disciplines and different types of publications, e.g, research journals, review journals, monographs, text books, etc. IFLA and IPA support a debate that avoids general conclusions for all scholarly communication but gives a closer, differentiated focus on the potentially very different framework in various academic disciplines and types of publications.
  7. Equally, scholarly publishers and their specific roles and functions can vary greatly. Scholarly publishing includes publishers with a variety of commercial and non-commercial affiliations and interests, outside and within the research community.
  8. IFLA and IPA believe publishers, librarians, government and funding agencies should at this stage support innovation, experimentation and pilot schemes on access to scholarly publications. Pilot schemes should be accompanied by vigorous research and analysis that enables evaluation against measurable targets, that reflect the chief concerns of academic authors (as set out in Point 2), as the basis for an enriched, fact-oriented debate. As part of investigating the feasibility of open access, studies should also explore such matters as impact, transparency and economic models. Data should be shared openly among stakeholders or disclosed to allow open scrutiny. The results from these studies should provide better insight into the processes surrounding open access.

See also the press release.

Google and University of Michigan Sign Expanded Digitization Agreement

Google and the University of Michigan have signed an expanded digitization agreement that incorporates the terms of the Google Book Search Settlement Agreement.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Specifically, the agreement:

Expands the scope of Google and University of Michigan's partnership:
The University of Michigan continues its tradition of leadership in library digitization by being the first library to expand its partnership with Google under the terms of Google's settlement agreement with a broad class of authors and publishers. The principles underlying the new agreement are to ensure access to our collection, to provide a solid foundation for future research and study, and to provide the greatest public good for patrons of libraries around the US.

Broadens public access to University of Michigan's collections:
Once the settlement is approved by the court, readers and students throughout the US will enjoy the benefits of University of Michigan's collections, including free previews, the ability to buy access to University of Michigan's books online, and institutional subscriptions.

Supports shared services with other libraries:
The agreement empowers University of Michigan to broaden public access to its collection by using digital files of books that Google scans to strengthen and support initiatives like HathiTrust.

Provides greater digital access to University of Michigan's collections for students and faculty:
University of Michigan will get a digital copy of every book held in their collection, whether it's scanned from Michigan or at another library.

Broadens access to public domain books from University of Michigan's collection:
The University of Michigan will be able to share digital copies of public domain works Google has digitized from its collection with fellow academic institutions, libraries, and other organizations for non-commercial purposes. These provisions enable Michigan to share its digital library collection with students, scholars, and other library users around the world.

Subsidizes University of Michigan's Institutional Subscription:
If approved by the court, Google's agreement with authors and publishers allows it to make millions of digitized books available to colleges and universities via a subscription. Under our new agreement, Google will subsidize the cost of Michigan's subscription based on the number of books scanned from Michigan. In practice, this means that Google will subsidize the entire cost of Michigan's institutional subscription–so that Michigan's students and staff will be able to access and read almost every book Google has digitized from 29 libraries around the world, for free.

Expands access for students, faculty, and patrons with disabilities:
Google will make public domain works digitized from Michigan's print library collection accessible to users with print disabilities in the same ways as in-copyright books covered under the settlement agreement.

Safeguards the public's access to knowledge:
Michigan's agreement includes collective terms Google has committed to that can be enjoyed by any of Google's other partner libraries. Michigan is the first university to sign on to these terms, which give libraries new ways to help safeguard the public's access to these books.

Establishes a mechanism to review prices:
Our agreement gives Michigan and other participating libraries the power to review the pricing of Institutional Subscriptions to make sure that they are priced for "broad penetration," as required by the settlement agreement. That means that the reviewer will evaluate whether subscriptions are affordable enough to allow universities, libraries, and other institutions across the country to take advantage of them.

If they determine that prices are too high, University of Michigan and other participating libraries who sign these collective terms can challenge the prices through arbitration, and Google will be required to work with the Registry to adjust the pricing accordingly.

Ensures access to millions of books for generations to come:
Google has committed to make the books it has scanned publicly available for free search, consumer purchase, institutional subscriptions, and other services established by the settlement agreement. Our agreement ensures that libraries and their patrons can continue to use digital copies of the millions of books Google has scanned well into the future, even if Google goes away.

Also see the press release.

Print-on-Demand/Short Run Book Titles Increase 132% in 2008, Exceeding Traditional Book Titles for First Time

Bowker reports that print-on-demand and short-run book titles grew 132% in 2008, and, for the first time, they exceeded traditional book titles.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Based on preliminary figures from U.S. publishers, Bowker is projecting that U.S. title output in 2008 decreased by 3.2%, with 275,232 new titles and editions, down from the 284,370 that were published in 2007.

Despite this decline in traditional book publishing, there was another extraordinary year of growth in the reported number of "On Demand" and short-run books produced in 2008. Bowker projects that 285,394 On Demand books were produced last year, a staggering 132% increase over last year’s final total of 123,276 titles. This is the second consecutive year of triple-digit growth in the On Demand segment, which in 2008 was 462% above levels seen as recently as 2006.

"Our statistics for 2008 benchmark an historic development in the U.S. book publishing industry as we crossed a point last year in which On Demand and short-run books exceeded the number of traditional books entering the marketplace," said Kelly Gallagher, vice president of publisher services for New Providence, N.J.-based Bowker. "It remains to be seen how this trend will unfold in the coming years before we know if we just experienced a watershed year in the book publishing industry, fueled by the changing dynamics of the marketplace and the proliferation of sophisticated publishing technologies, or an anomaly that caused the major industry trade publishers to retrench."

Scribd Store Launched

Scribd has launched the Scribd Store.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Scribd Store (www.scribd.com/store) expands Scribd's library of free original documents to include for-purchase works, many of which are new, exclusive or hard-to-find anywhere else on the Internet. In a radical departure from industry norms, the Scribd Store offers a generous revenue sharing agreement that gives sellers 80% of revenue. Prices are set by the seller and currently range from $1 for a graphic novel panel to $5,000 for an in-depth China market research report. Sellers can also choose Scribd's automated pricing option, which generates an optimal price tag based on a cost-sales analysis of similar items in the Scribd Store. . . .

The company will soon launch an iPhone application to give readers and buyers access to documents across multiple platforms; the mobile-optimized version of Scribd.com is already very popular. At launch, the beta version of Scribd Store will be open to buyers and sellers in the United States, with international launches to follow. . . .

With Scribd Store's flexible pricing, publishers have complete control over price and packaging. Sellers can specify selling whole documents, a chapter or an exact selection of pages, or in installments. They can also choose whether to serialize their books for $1.00/chapter; now, instead of having to purchase a country guide travelers can buy a standalone city chapter from Lonely Planet. Documents can be read on Scribd.com, downloaded to a PC, printed, or made accessible through web-enabled mobile phones. . . .

Sellers on Scribd Store must own the digital rights to the works they wish to sell and provide detailed information about their ownership of those works in order to sell their works through Scribd Store. Sellers can also easily manage their digital rights—choosing viewing/reading options such as "View on Scribd only," "Download PDF," "Download PDF with DRM" or "Download ePub with DRM." Sellers have the flexibility to make real-time changes to pricing and preview options for their works at any time.

Read more about it at "Scribd Launches Online Book Market," "Scribd Store a Welcome Addition to Ebook Market (and 650 O'Reilly Titles Included)," and "Site Lets Writers Sell Digital Copies ."

University of Pittsburgh Press Makes 500 Titles Open Access and Print-on-Demand

The University of Pittsburgh Press has made 500 out-of-print titles open access with a future fee-based print-on-demand option.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The University of Pittsburgh Press, in collaboration with the University of Pittsburgh Library System and the Chicago Digital Distribution Center (CDDC), is making nearly 500 out-of-print Press titles available again for scholars and students around the world.

Representing the full range of scholarly series and subject areas published by the Press, these titles are now part of the University of Pittsburgh Press Digital Editions collection, fully searchable and freely accessible to anyone with an internet connection through the University of Pittsburgh Library System's D-Scribe Digital Publishing Program. Over the next year, they will also be made available for purchase in reasonably priced paperback editions through the CDDC. Readers and researchers may read and search the full texts online, and those who wish to have a print copy may purchase it through retail outlets or directly from the Press.

Proposed Budget Cuts Threaten LSU Press

The Louisiana State University Press is listed in "Louisiana State University System: Preliminary Budget Reduction Proposals" under a $4,100,000 "Cut general fund support to academic support units" item, which says:

This cut will require certain academic support entities to implement new fees for their services or to increase their existing fees to students, faculty, staff, and/or the general public. Because of the nature of some of these entities and their fixed cost of operation, it is very possible they cannot generate the revenue needed and will close. Examples of units that may be impacted as a result of this type of decision are the LSU Museum of Art, Rural Life Museum, Hilltop Arboretum, LSU Press, Southern Review, Louisiana Library Network, Alumni Association and the Fire & Emergency Training Institute.

Read more about it at "Louisiana State U. Press Might Get the Ax."

DigitalKoans

Wolters Kluwer 2009 First-Quarter Update

Wolters Kluwer released its "Wolters Kluwer 2009 First-Quarter Scheduled Trading Update."

Here's an excerpt:

The company continues to see resilience in its first-quarter profitability despite challenging economic conditions in North America and Europe which have impacted the buying decisions of our professional customers. Regardless of these challenges, the professionals we serve continued to demand new and innovative solutions to improve their productivity. We continued to address these needs and as a result revenues from online and software solutions exceeded 50% of total revenues in the quarter. Retention rates on subscription products were largely in line with the prior year, while new subscription sales and sales on transactional products were weak as anticipated at the beginning of the year and from delayed customer purchase decisions. Despite these conditions, the ordinary EBITA margin [Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization margin] in the first quarter was in line with the prior year due to earlier cost containment actions, the continued migration of revenues from print to electronic products, the benefits of the Springboard operational excellence program and the contribution of higher margin acquisitions completed in the prior year. First-quarter cash flow was in line with expectations, and integration of prior year acquisitions is on track. The resilient portfolio and strong cash generation continue to support a solid financial position.

DigitalKoans

Digital Videos from Columbia’s Scholarly Communication Program’s Research without Borders 2008-2009 Program

A complete set of digital videos from Columbia University's Scholarly Communication Program's "Research without Borders" 2008-2009 program is now available.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The inaugural year of Research without Borders featured speakers at the forefront of the open access movement as well as experts in scholarly publishing, information policy, and copyright law. Harvard Professor Stuart Shieber kicked off the series in the fall semester, tracing the development of Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences' Open Access Policy. The second panel, with Marian Hollingsworth from Thomson Reuters, Jevin West of Eigenfactor.org, and Johan Bollen of the MESUR project, debated the controversial Impact Factor, a metric of scholarly journals' prominence. Helen Tartar and Sanford Thatcher, leaders of Fordham and Penn State University Presses, respectively, joined Columbia Libraries' Ree DeDonato for the third event, which focused on the future of scholarly monographs.

The spring semester opened with a discussion on the benefits of open science with Bora Zivkovic of the Public Library of Science, Jean-Claude Bradley of Drexel University, and Barry Canton of OpenWetWare and Ginkgo BioWorks. In March, UCLA's Christine Borgman, author of Scholarship in the Digital Age (2007), spoke to a packed room on information infrastructure and policy. The final event explored the implications of copyright trends for research, featuring SPARC's Heather Joseph, Michael Carroll of Washington Law School at American University, and Kenneth Crews of the Columbia University Copyright Advisory Office.

The Research Without Borders series will continue in the 2009-10 academic year with six new events on topics including scholarly blogging, open data, and open-access business models. Stay connected to the Program by following ScholarlyComm at http://twitter.com/ScholarlyComm, by joining the Scholarly Communication Program Facebook group, and through the iTunesU page. For more information on the Program and the series, please email Kathryn Pope at kp2002@columbia.edu, or visit http://scholcomm.columbia.edu.

DigitalKoans