Archive for the 'Publishing' Category

"Finch Group" Open Access Report: Accessibility, Sustainability, Excellence: How to Expand Access to Research Publications

Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Reports and White Papers on June 19th, 2012

The Research Information Network has released Accessibility, Sustainability, Excellence: How to Expand Access to Research Publications. Report of the Working Group on Expanding Access to Published Research Findings. For background on the report, see "Working Group on Expanding Access to Published Research Findings."

Here's an excerpt:

This report tackles the important question of how to achieve better, faster access to research publications for anyone who wants to read or use them. It has been produced by an independent working group made up of representatives of universities, research funders, learned societies, publishers, and libraries. The group's remit has been to examine how to expand access to the peer-reviewed publications that arise from research undertaken both in the UK and in the rest of the world; and to propose a programme of action to that end.

We have concentrated on journals which publish research results and findings. Virtually all are now published online, and they increasingly include sophisticated navigation, linking and interactive services. Making them freely accessible at the point of use, with minimal if any limitations on how they can be used, offers the potential

Our aim has been to identify key goals and guiding principles in a period of transition towards wider access. We have sought ways both to accelerate that transition and also to sustain what is valuable in a complex ecology with many different agents and stakeholders.

In "Finch Group report on OA in the UK," Peter Suber said of the report:

Bottom line: On the plus side, the Finch group wants a massive shift to OA. It prefers immediate to embargoed OA, and it prefers libre to gratis OA. Some of its reasons for preferring gold to green OA are based on real virtues of gold. On the minus side, most of its reasons for preferring gold to green OA are based on a distorted and jaundiced view of green. The group implies that green cannot be libre (8.9, 8.28), which is false. It implies that green cannot be peer reviewed (8.26) which is false. It implies that green cannot be immediate or must be embargoed (8.28), which is false. It virtually disregards the role of green OA in disseminating peer-reviewed research and values green primarily for providing access to data, and access to grey literature, and preservation. One can see the effect of publisher lobbying on the group's misinformed disparagement of green OA and the group's high priority to save incumbent publishers from risk.

Read more about it at "U.K. Panel Backs Open Access for All Publicly Funded Research Papers."

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

Be Sociable, Share!

    Digital Book Publishing in the AAUP Community Survey Report: Spring 2012

    Posted in E-Books, Publishing, Reports and White Papers on June 18th, 2012

    The Association of American University Presses has released Digital Book Publishing in the AAUP Community Survey Report: Spring 2012

    Here's an excerpt:

    In addition to gathering data about e-book revenue, digital marketing and discovery strategies, and format and channel availability, we also asked respondents to share their opinions about major concerns or hurdles they are facing, and to tell us more about their presses' e-book goals.

    | Digital Scholarship |

    Be Sociable, Share!

      "Green and Gold Open Access Percentages and Growth, by Discipline"

      Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Self-Archiving on June 17th, 2012

      Yassine Gargouri, Vincent Lariviere, Yves Gingras, Les Carr, and Stevan Harnad have self-archived "Green and Gold Open Access Percentages and Growth, by Discipline" in ePrints Soton.

      Here's an excerpt from:

      Most refereed journal articles today are published in subscription journals, accessible only to subscribing institutions, hence losing considerable research impact. Making articles freely accessible online ("Open Access," OA) maximizes their impact. Articles can be made OA in two ways: by self-archiving them on the web ("Green OA") or by publishing them in OA journals ("Gold OA"). We compared the percent and growth rate of Green and Gold OA for 14 disciplines in two random samples of 1300 articles per discipline out of the 12,500 journals indexed by Thomson-Reuters-ISI using a robot that trawled the web for OA full-texts. We sampled in 2009 and 2011 for publication year ranges 1998-2006 and 2005-2010, respectively. Green OA (21.4%) exceeds Gold OA (2.4%) in proportion and growth rate in all but the biomedical disciplines, probably because it can be provided for all journals articles and does not require paying extra Gold OA publication fees. The spontaneous overall OA growth rate is still very slow (about 1% per year). If institutions make Green OA self-archiving mandatory, however, it triples percent Green OA as well as accelerating its growth rate.

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

      Be Sociable, Share!

        MIT Press Publishes Open Access by Peter Suber

        Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Self-Archiving on June 17th, 2012

        The MIT Press has published Open Access by Peter Suber. The Kindle version is currently available, and the paperback version can be preordered.

        An open access version will be available one year from now.

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

        Be Sociable, Share!

          Open Access Publishing: PeerJ Announced

          Posted in E-Prints, Open Access, Publishing on June 12th, 2012

          PeerJ has issued a press release about its open access publishing services.

          Here's an excerpt:

          PeerJ Inc. (http://peerj.com), a new Open Access academic publishing company, formally announced itself today. Founded by seasoned academic publishing and technology professionals from PLoS ONE and Mendeley, PeerJ will publish a broad based, rapid, peer-reviewed journal ('PeerJ') and an innovative preprint server ('PeerJ PrePrints'). PeerJ will open for submissions in Summer 2012, and will publish its first articles in December 2012. . . .

          PeerJ will publish all well reported, scientifically sound research in the Biological and Medical Sciences. The journal will operate a rigorous peer review process and will deliver the highest standards in everything it does. . . .

          Unique among academic publishers, PeerJ provides authors with low cost lifetime memberships giving them the rights to publish their papers freely thereafter. Three membership plans exist—Basic, Enhanced and Investigator. All member plans confer lifetime rights, and the three tiers allow members to publish once, twice, or an unlimited number of times per year in PeerJ. Each author on a paper must be a member and the Basic membership plan is just $99.

          Read more about it at "Scholarly Publishing 2012: Meet PeerJ."

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

          Be Sociable, Share!

            Association of American Publishers Issues Statement on Georgia State University E-Reserves Copyright Case Ruling

            Posted in Copyright, Digital Copyright Wars, E-Reserves, Publishing on May 15th, 2012

            The Association of American Publishers has issued a statement on the Georgia State University e-reserves copyright case ruling.

            Here's an excerpt from the press release:

            At the same time, we are disappointed with aspects of the Court's decision. Most importantly, the Court failed to examine the copying activities at GSU in their full context. Many faculty members have provided students with electronic anthologies of copyrighted course materials which are not different in kind from copyrighted print materials. In addition, the Court's analysis of fair use principles was legally incorrect in some places and its application of those principles mistaken. As a result, instances of infringing activity were incorrectly held to constitute fair use. . . .

            The Court's ruling has important implications for the ongoing vitality of academic publishing as well as the educational mission of colleges and universities. Contrary to the findings of the Court, if institutions such as GSU are allowed to offer substantial amounts of copyrighted content for free, publishers cannot sustain the creation of works of scholarship. The resources available to educators will be fundamentally impaired.

            | E-science and Academic Libraries Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

            Be Sociable, Share!

              "Issue Brief: GSU Fair Use Decision Recap and Implications"

              Posted in Copyright, Digital Copyright Wars, E-Reserves, Publishing on May 15th, 2012

              ARL has released "Issue Brief: GSU Fair Use Decision Recap and Implications."

              Here's an excerpt:

              Although the decision is certainly not perfect (the use of bright line rules for appropriate amount under factor 3 is particularly troubling), Judge Evans has written a thorough and thoughtful analysis of the issues, and her opinion represents an overwhelming victory for Georgia State individually, a major defeat for the plaintiff publishers and for the AAP and CCC, and overall a positive development for libraries generally. The substance of the opinion is not ideal, but it is far more generous than the publishers have sought, it establishes a very comfortable safe harbor for fair use of books on e-reserve, and libraries remain free to take more progressive steps.

              | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Weblog | Digital Scholarship |

              Be Sociable, Share!

                Georgia State University E-Reserves Copyright Case Ruling (Cambridge University Press et al. v. Patton et al.)

                Posted in Copyright, Digital Copyright Wars, E-Reserves, Publishing on May 13th, 2012

                The ruling is in for the Cambridge University Press et al. v. Patton et al. case.

                Here's an excerpt from the ruling:

                Of the 99 alleged infringements that Plaintiffs maintained at the start of trial, only 75 were submitted for post-trial findings of fact and conclusions of law. This Order concludes that the unlicensed use of five excerpts (of four different books) infringed Plaintiffs' copyrights. The question now is whether Georgia State's 2009 Copyright Policy caused those infringements. The Court finds that it did, in that the policy did not limit copying in those instances to decidedly small excerpts as required by this Order. Nor did it proscribe the use of multiple chapters from the same book. Also, the fair use policy did not provide sufficient guidance in determining the "actual or potential effect on the market or the value of the copyrighted work," a task which would likely be futile for prospective determinations (in advance of litigation). The only practical way to deal with factor four in advance likely is to assume that it strongly favors the plaintiff-publisher (if licensed digital excerpts are available).

                Read more about it at "The GSU Decision—Not an Easy Road for Anyone" and “Inside the Georgia State Opinion.”

                | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010: "SEP [Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography] is compiled with utter professionalism. It reminds me of the work of the best artisans who know not only every item that leaves their workshops, but each component used to create them—providing the ideal quality control." — Péter Jacsó ONLINE 27, no. 3 (2003): 73-76. | Digital Scholarship |

                Be Sociable, Share!

                  Page 40 of 116« First...102030...3839404142...506070...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 3.0 United States License.