Category: Self-Archiving

University of Kansas Becomes First U.S. Public University to Pass University-Wide Open Access Policy

The University of Kansas has become the first U.S. public university to pass a university-wide open access policy. (Thanks to Open Access News.)

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Under the new faculty-initiated policy approved by Chancellor Robert Hemenway, digital copies of all articles produced by the university’s professors will be housed in KU ScholarWorks, an existing digital repository for scholarly work created by KU faculty and staff in 2005. KU ScholarWorks houses more than 4,400 articles submitted in digital formats that assure their long-term preservation.

Professors will be allowed to seek a waiver but otherwise will be asked to provide electronic forms of all articles to the repository. KU’s Faculty Senate overwhelmingly endorsed the policy at a meeting earlier this year, but additional policy details, including the waiver process, will be developed by a senate task force in the coming academic year, said Faculty Senate President Lisa Wolf-Wendel, professor of education leadership and policy studies. The task force will be led by Ada Emmett, associate librarian for scholarly communications.

"Academic publishing has become increasingly commercial and unavailable to other scholars, or to the general public, in recent years," said A. Townsend Peterson, distinguished professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and curator at the Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center at KU. " This new policy offers a voluntary means of opening doors to much of KU's journal-based scholarship. This policy represents a first step towards a new means of scholarly communication, in which the entire global academic community has access to the totality of scholarship. We all can participate in the scholarly exchange that leads to new knowledge creation."

Peterson said open access policies such as KU's will bring greater visibility to the authors' work and will showcase the breadth and depth of the faculty's contributions to academic research and to the university's mission.

"Granting the university the right to deposit a copy of scholarly journal articles in an open digital repository extends the reach of the scholarship, providing the widest possible audience and increasing its possible impact," said Lorraine J. Haricombe, dean of libraries.

Harvard Graduate School of Education Faculty Adopt Open Access Policy

The Harvard Graduate School of Education faculty have adopted an open access policy. (Thanks to Open Access News.)

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The faculty of the Harvard Graduate School of Education (HGSE) voted overwhelmingly at its last faculty meeting to allow the university to make all faculty members' scholarly articles publicly available online. The resolution makes HGSE the fourth of Harvard's 10 schools to endorse open access to faculty research publications. The Faculties of Arts and Sciences, the Harvard Law School, and the Harvard Kennedy School all passed similar policies in recent months. . . .

As a result of the resolution, HGSE faculty will now provide their scholarly articles to the Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication for deposit in an open access digital repository that is currently under development. When the repository launches later this year, the contents will be freely available to the public, unless an author chooses to embargo or block access. The policy makes rights sharing with publishers and self-archiving the default, while allowing faculty to waive Harvard's license on a case-by-case basis, at the author's discretion.

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.

Japanese Institutional Repositories: IRDB Contents Analysis System Enhanced

The NII Institutional Repositories DataBase Contents Analysis has been enhanced with new features.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

We have made the following improvements:

  1. The default in "Content growth" has been changed to "Full text". . .
  2. "Breakdown of content by resource type (ratio)" has been added. . .
  3. The details of data have been hidden. . .
  4. The analysis of content has been added. . .

“Achieving the Full Potential of Repository Deposit Policies”

Karla Hahn has published "Achieving the Full Potential of Repository Deposit Policies" in the latest issue of Research Library Issues.

Here's an excerpt:

Editor's note: A small group of individuals with expertise on author-rights policies, the campus policy environment, National Institutes of Health (NIH) deposit processes, and digital repository services met in Washington DC on January 9, 2009, under the auspices of ARL's Public Policy and Scholarly Communication programs. The group explored opportunities, desired outcomes, and policy issues involved in developing capabilities for institutionally mediated deposit processes and content transfer between institution-based and funder-based repositories, particularly PubMed Central. Based on that discussion, the group also identified potential strategies that would lead toward creating the needed rights-management environment and repository services. This essay reflects the January 9 discussions.

Also of interest in this issue are: "Author-Rights Language in Library Content Licenses," "Digital Scholarly Communication: A Snapshot of Current Trends," and "Strategies for Supporting New Genres of Scholarship."

University of Washington Faculty Senate Passes Resolution Concerning Scholarly Publishing Alternatives and Authors’ Rights

The University of Washington Faculty Senate has passed a "Resolution Concerning Scholarly Publishing Alternatives and Authors' Rights." (Thanks to Open Access News.)

Here's an excerpt:

BE IT RESOLVED, that

1. the University of Washington prepare for a future in which academic publications are increasingly available through open sources by encouraging faculty members to:

  • assess the pricing practices and authors' rights policies of journals with which they collaborate (as authors, reviewers, and editors) and advocate for improvements therein; and
  • adopt and use an Addendum to Publication Agreement such as that provided by the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) in order to retain their rights to use their work in the classroom and in future publications and to archive final accepted manuscripts; and
  • publish scholarly works in moderately priced journals, in journals published by professional societies and associations, or in peer-reviewed "open access" journals; and
  • archive their work in the UW's ResearchWorks or other repositories supported by research institutions, professional societies, or government agencies in order to provide the widest and most affordable access to their scholarship; and

2. UW Libraries is encouraged to

  • provide relevant, current information regarding journal publishers, pricing, and authors' rights to departments and individual faculty members; and
  • maintain and further develop ResearchWorks and related services; and
  • allocate personnel to facilitate the deposit of faculty publications in ResearchWorks, and to obtain publishers' permission to deposit previously published works when possible; and

3. the University of Washington administration is encouraged to:

  • provide resources to the Libraries and to academic units to foster these efforts; and
  • work with departments and colleges to assure that the review process for promotion, tenure and merit takes into consideration these new trends and realities in academic publication.

SWORD Named Most Innovative Project at JISC Repositories and Preservation Conference

UKOLN's SWORD (Simple Web-service Offering Repository Deposit) Project was named most innovative project at the JISC Repositories and Preservation conference.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

SWORD, whose partners include developers of the DSpace, EPrints, Fedora and IntraLibrary repository software platforms, plus the University of York and CASIS at the University of Wales, has created a mechanism for repositories to deposit and receive deposits via a standard protocol, thus making it possible for different repositories and other applications to move content around more easily. SWORD has received much interest, and a growing community of active developers is building, including Microsoft whose SWORD plug-in can support deposits direct to a repository from within Microsoft Word. FeedForward, a close second for the award, is also SWORD-compliant. Work on SWORD continues within the UKOLN suite of activities.

University of Calgary Academic Council of Library and Cultural Resources Adopts Open Access Mandate

The University of Calgary's Academic Council of Libraries and Cultural Resources has adopted an open access mandate. (Thanks to Open Access News.)

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Academic Council of Libraries and Cultural Resources at the University of Calgary has adopted a mandate to deposit their scholarly output in Dspace, the University’s open access scholarly repository. The repository has been in place since March 2003 and currently provides access to a broad range of scholarly output, including a growing collection of full text university theses.

Members of the Council, comprised of archivists, curators, and librarians, have long supported open access through promotions on campus such as Open Access Day, membership in SPARC and Canadian Association of Research Libraries, support for online open access journals published through the University of Calgary Press, and an active program of introducing the repository to faculty and graduate students. Libraries and Cultural Resources also funds the $100,000 Open Access Authors Fund to assist researchers to publish in open access journals.

The text of the mandate is:

"As an active member of the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, Libraries and Cultural Resources at the University of Calgary endorses the Budapest Open Access Initiative, the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing and the Berlin Declaration.

LCR academic staff members believe that the output of our scholarly activities should be as widely disseminated and openly available as possible. Our scholarly output includes but is not limited to journal articles, books and book chapters, presentations if substantial, conference papers and proceedings, and datasets.

Effective April 17, 2009, LCR academic staff commit to

  • Deposit their scholarly output in the University of Calgary’s open access scholarly repository
  • Promote Open Access on campus and assist scholars in making their research openly available
  • Where possible, publish their research in an open-access journal"

IR Deposit Using Embedded Document Metadata: Deposit Plait: Final Report

JISC has released Deposit Plait: Final Report.

Here's an excerpt:

The aim of the Deposit Plait project was to examine potential for easing the deposit of journal articles into institutional repositories by making use of any metadata embedded within the document properties of the document being deposited. . . .

The first stage of the project was to see how easy it is to extract this metadata. The target file formats that the project worked with were the Open Document Format (as created by OpenOffice), OpenXML (as created by Microsoft Office 2007), and .doc files (as created by version of Microsoft Office from 97 to 2003). There are standard open source software libraries that can extract both standard and custom metadata fields from each of these file forms.

The second stage of the project was to see how easy it is to use extracted metadata as search terms in order to search for a more complete metadata record. In the case where the item being deposited into the repository has been in existence for some time (it is a 'retrospective deposit') then metadata found can be used to perform a search. Different search methods were implemented as examples, including using search APIs, and screen scraping from search services. Whilst the method works fine, there are the normal licensing issues to consider, and whether licences cover the user for this type of metadata re-use.

The project concluded by creating an online demonstration system. In contrast to a normal repository deposit where the user enters metadata, and then uploads a file, this system requires the user to first upload a file. The metadata is extracted, and the user is allowed to choose which (one or more) of the fields to use as the basis of a search. The search is then initiated and matching records returned. The user can then pick and choose fields from the results the 'plait' together their final metadata record.

DigitalKoans

Stevan Harnad: “Waking OA’s ‘Slumbering Giant’: The University’s Mandate To Mandate Open Access”

Stevan Harnad has self-archived "Waking OA's 'Slumbering Giant': The University's Mandate To Mandate Open Access" in the ECS EPrints Repository.

Here's an excerpt:

Open Access (OA) will not come until universities, the universal research-providers, make it part of their mandate not only to publish their research findings, as now, but also to see to it that the few extra keystrokes it takes to make those published findings OA—by self-archiving them in their institutional repositories, free for all online—are done too. Students and junior faculty—the next generation of researchers and users—are in a position to help convince their universities to go ahead and mandate OA self-archiving, at long last.

Draft Report on the Provision of Usage Data and Manuscript Procedures for Publishers and Repository Managers

The PEER (Publishing and the Ecology of European Research) project has released Draft Report on the Provision of Usage Data and Manuscript Procedures for Publishers and Repository Managers.

Here's an excerpt:

This draft report sets out specifications for deposit procedures for both publishers and authors, and the reporting in log files of subsequent usage. Since this report is presented in draft format, it is anticipated that such specification will be adjusted as a result of actual implementation experience. Until the ultimate formulation of specifications and guidelines is achieved, a support mechanism is envisaged to assist both publisher and repository communities to share the experience gained. . .

This report is designed to be preliminary investigation of the issues addressed herein. As such, it forms the basis for a common understanding of the expected outcomes of the PEER project, and it highlights the issues of concern that need to be monitored and evaluated in the final report. Significantly, it indicates workflows, procedures and best practices that will be explored towards the establishment of best practice shared by publisher and library communities to ensure the future of scholarly communication.

Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication and the American Physical Society Agree on Open Access Arrangements

The Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication and the American Physical Society have come to an agreement about how to implement Harvard's open access policies for articles published by Harvard authors.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

As a result of the new agreement, APS recognizes Harvard's open access license and will not require copyright agreement addenda or waivers, in exchange for Harvard's clarification of its intended use of the license. In general terms, in exercising its license under the open access policies, Harvard will not use a facsimile of the published version without permission of the publisher, will not charge for the display or distribution of those articles, and will provide an online link to the publisher's definitive version of the articles where possible. The agreement does not restrict fair use of the articles in any way.

According to Professor Bertrand I. Halperin, Hollis Professor of Mathematics and Natural Philosophy in the Harvard Physics Department and Chair of the 2008 Publications Oversight Committee of the American Physical Society, "Harvard’s open access legislation was always consistent in spirit with the aims of the APS publication policies, but there were differences in detail that would have required faculty members to request a waiver for every article published in an APS journal. It is a credit both to Harvard and to APS that these differences have been worked out. Since APS journals include, arguably, the most important journals in the field of physics, the fact that faculty will now be able to continue publishing in APS journals without seeking a waiver from Harvard’s policies will strengthen both Harvard and the goal of promoting open access to scholarly publications worldwide."

“Self-Archiving Journal Articles: A Case Study of Faculty Practice and Missed Opportunity”

Denise Troll Covey has published "Self-Archiving Journal Articles: A Case Study of Faculty Practice and Missed Opportunity" in the latest issue of portal: Libraries and the Academy (restricted access journal).

Here's the abstract:

Carnegie Mellon faculty Web pages and publisher policies were examined to understand self-archiving practice. The breadth of adoption and depth of commitment are not directly correlated within the disciplines. Determining when self-archiving has become a habit is difficult. The opportunity to self-archive far exceeds the practice, and much of what is self-archived is not aligned with publisher policy. Policy appears to influence neither the decision to self-archive nor the article version that is self-archived. Because of the potential legal ramifications, faculty must be convinced that copyright law and publisher policy are important and persuaded to act on that conviction.

Covey previously self-archived "Faculty Self-Archiving Practices: A Case Study" in Carnegie Mellon's Research Showcase.

Here's the abstract:

Faculty web pages were examined to learn about self-archiving practice at Carnegie Mellon. More faculty are self-archiving their work and more work is being self-archived than expected. However, the distribution of self-archiving activity across the disciplines is not as expected. More faculty self-archive journal articles than other publications, but more conference papers are self-archived than journal articles. Many faculty who self-archive have self-archived fewer than ten publications. A small number of faculty has self-archived most of the work that is available open access from faculty web pages. Significant differences in faculty behavior within departments cannot be explained by disciplinary culture.

“‘Publishers Did Not Take the Bait’: A Forgotten Precursor to the NIH Public Access Policy”

Jonathan Miller has published "'Publishers Did Not Take the Bait': A Forgotten Precursor to the NIH Public Access Policy" in the latest issue of College & Research Libraries (access is restricted under the journal's embargo policy).

Here's an excerpt:

This article compares the recent National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy (2005-07) with the United States Office of Education policy on copyright in funded research (1965-70). The two policies and the differing technological and political contexts of the periods are compared and contrasted. The author concludes that a more nuanced approach to copyright, the digital information environment, and the support of an energized user community auger well for the success of the NIH policy, but that it is still too soon to tell.

Oregon State University Libraries Adopt Library Faculty Open Access Policy

The Oregon State University Libraries faculty have adopted a Library Faculty Open Access Policy. (Thanks to Circulation: Just Another Librarian Blog.)

Here's the policy:

The faculty members of the OSU Libraries support open access to our scholarship and knowledge. Consequently, we grant to the OSU Libraries permission to make our scholarly work publicly available and to exercise the copyright in those works. We grant the OSU Libraries a nonexclusive, irrevocable, worldwide license to exercise any and all rights under copyright relating to our scholarly work, in any medium, and to authorize others to do the same, provided that the works are properly attributed to the authors and not sold for a profit.

The policy will apply to all scholarly works authored or co-authored while a faculty member of the University Libraries, beginning with works created after March 2009. Works include the following:

  • articles
  • internal reports of interest to a broader audience
  • presentations if substantial
  • conference papers and proceedings if more than an abstract

When a publisher is involved who will not agree to the terms of this policy as stated in the Science Commons Access-Reuse Addendum, the University Librarian or the University Librarian’s designate will waive application of the policy upon written request from faculty. When a waiver is granted, faculty are encouraged to deposit whatever version of the article the publisher allows (e.g. pre or post-print). No later than the date of publication or distribution, faculty members will deposit an electronic copy of the final published version of the work, in an appropriate format (such as PDF), at no charge to ScholarsArchive@OSU. Alternatively, faculty members may provide an electronic copy of the final published version to the appropriate representative of the Digital Access Services Department, who will make the work available to the public in ScholarsArchive@OSU.

The policy will be reviewed after three years and a report presented to the Library Faculty.

MIT Open Access Policy Approved

The MIT Faculty Open-Access Policy was approved unanimously by the faculty today. It is effective immediately.

Here's an excerpt:

The Faculty of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is committed to disseminating the fruits of its research and scholarship as widely as possible. In keeping with that commitment, the Faculty adopts the following policy: Each Faculty member grants to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology nonexclusive permission to make available his or her scholarly articles and to exercise the copyright in those articles for the purpose of open dissemination. In legal terms, each Faculty member grants to MIT a nonexclusive, irrevocable, paid-up, worldwide 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 a profit, and to authorize others to do the same. The policy will apply to all scholarly articles written while the person is a member of the Faculty except for any articles completed before the adoption of this policy and any articles for which the Faculty member entered into an incompatible licensing or assignment agreement before the adoption of this policy. The Provost or Provost's designate will waive application of the policy for a particular article upon written notification by the author, who informs MIT of the reason.

To assist the Institute in distributing the scholarly articles, as of the date of publication, each Faculty member will make available an electronic copy of his or her final version of the article at no charge to a designated representative of the Provost's Office in appropriate formats (such as PDF) specified by the Provost's Office.

The Provost's Office will make the scholarly article available to the public in an open- access repository. The Office of the Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Committee on the Library System will be responsible for interpreting this policy, resolving disputes concerning its interpretation and application, and recommending changes to the Faculty.

Read more about it at "MIT Adopts a University-wide OA Mandate."

CLASM: Copyright Licensing Application with SWORD for Moodle

Richard M. Davis has announced that JISC has funded the CLASM (Copyright Licensing Application with SWORD for Moodle) project. (Moodle is an open source course management system.)

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

This will be a six-month project with a double-edged purpose: to develop a SWORD plugin for Moodle, so that it can interact, platform independently, with common repository applications like EPrints and DSpace; and to explore and demonstrate the use of that plugin for managing Copyright Licensed materials in Moodle courses.

Harvard Kennedy School of Government Adopts Open Access Policy

The Harvard Kennedy School of Government has adopted an open access policy. Previously, the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences and the Harvard Law School have adopted open access policies. (Thanks to Stevan Harnad.)

Here's an excerpt:

The Faculty of the Harvard Kennedy School of Government is committed to disseminating the fruits of its research and scholarship as widely as possible. In keeping with that commitment, the Faculty adopts the following policy: Each Faculty member grants to the President and Fellows of Harvard College permission to make available his or her scholarly articles and to exercise the copyright in those articles. More specifically, each Faculty member grants to the President and Fellows a nonexclusive, irrevocable, worldwide license to exercise any and all rights under copyright relating to each of his or her scholarly articles, in any medium, and to authorize others to do the same, provided that the articles are not sold for a profit. The policy will apply to all scholarly articles authored or co-authored while the person is a member of the Faculty except for any articles completed before the adoption of this policy and any articles for which the Faculty member entered into an incompatible licensing or assignment agreement before the adoption of this policy. The Dean or the Dean's designate will waive application of the license for a particular article upon express direction by a Faculty member.

Each Faculty member will provide an electronic copy of the author's final version of each article at no charge to the appropriate representative of the Provost's Office in an appropriate format (such as PDF) specified by the Provost's Office no later than the date of its publication. The Provost's Office may make the article available to the public in an open-access repository.

“Scientific Journal Publishing: Yearly Volume and Open Access Availability”

Bo-Christer Björk, Annikki Roos and Mari Lauri have published "Scientific Journal Publishing: Yearly Volume and Open Access Availability" in the latest issue of Information Research.

Here's an excerpt from the abstract:

Results. We estimate that in 2006 the total number of articles published was approximately 1,350,000. Of this number 4.6% became immediately openly available and an additional 3.5% after an embargo period of, typically, one year. Furthermore, usable copies of 11.3% could be found in subject-specific or institutional repositories or on the home pages of the authors.

New Report Says Less Than 50% of Publishers Permit Self-Archiving in Disciplinary Archives

A new report from the Publishing Research Consortium, Journal Authors' Rights: Perception and Reality, says that less than 10% of publishers permit self-archiving of the publisher PDF file in any repository and less than 50% permit deposit of the submitted and the accepted article version in a disciplinary archive.

Here's an excerpt:

However, when it comes to self-archiving, although 80% or more allow self- archiving to a personal or departmental website, over 60% to an institutional repository, and over 40% to a subject repository, in most cases this is only permitted for the submitted and/or accepted version; use of the final, published version for self-archiving is very much more restricted.

Senate Spending Bill Includes NIH Open Access Provision

The Senate spending bill, which has been reported by the Washington Post and others as having passed, includes an NIH open access provision.

Here's an excerpt from "In 2009 Appropriations Bill, NIH Public Access Mandate Would Become Permanent":

In the section funding the NIH, section 217, pertaining to public access, reads:

"The Director of the National Institutes of Health shall require in the current fiscal year and thereafter [emphasis added] that all investigators funded by the NIH submit or have submitted for them to the National Library of Medicine's PubMed Central an electronic version their final, peer-reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication, to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of publication: provided, That the NIH shall implement the public access policy in a manner consistent with copyright law."

In his "Congress Makes NIH Policy Permanent (but for Conyers Bill) post," Peter Suber points out that because of the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act the NIH Public Access policy is still in danger.

Lawrence Lessig Replies to Rep. John Conyers about the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act

Lawrence Lessig has replied to Rep. John Conyers' "A Reply to Larry Lessig," which was written in response to "Is John Conyers Shilling for Special Interests?" by Lawrence Lessig and Michael Eisen.

Here's an excerpt:

Supporting citizens' funding of the nation's elections—as Mr. Conyers has—is an important first step. That one change, I believe, would do more than any other to restore trustworthiness in Congress.

But that's not all you could do, Mr. Conyers. You have it within your power to remove any doubt about the reasons you have for sponsoring the legislation you sponsor: Stop accepting contributions from the interests your committee regulates. This was the principle of at least some committee chairmen in the past. It is practically unheard of today. But you could set an important example for others, and for America, about how an uncorrupted system of government might work. And you could do so without any risk to your own position—because the product of your forty years of extraordinary work for the citizens of Michigan means that they'll return you to office whether or not you spend one dime on a reelection. Indeed, if you did this, I'd promise to come to Michigan and hand out leaflets for your campaign.

Until you do this, Mr. Conyers, don't lecture me about "crossing a line." For I intend to cross this line as often as I can, the outrage and scorn of Members of Congress notwithstanding. This is no time to play nice. And yours is just the first in a series of many such stories to follow—targeting Republicans as well as Democrats, people who we agree with on substance as well as those we don't, always focusing on bad bills that make sense only if you follow the money.

Michael Eisen Replies to Rep. John Conyers about the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act

Michael Eisen has replied to Rep. John Conyers' "A Reply to Larry Lessig," which was written in response to "Is John Conyers Shilling for Special Interests?" by Lawrence Lessig and Michael Eisen. (Thanks to Open Access News.)

Here's an excerpt:

Unfortunately, Representative Conyers actions do not reflect his words. This bill was introduced in the last Congress. The Judiciary Committee then held hearings on the bill, in which even the publishers' own witnesses pointed out flaws in its logic and approach. In particular, a previous Registrar of Copyrights, clearly sympathetic to the publishers' cause, acknowledged that the NIH Policy was in perfect accord with US copyright law and practice. If Conyers were so interested in dealing with a complex issue in a fair and reasonable way, why then did he completely ignore the results of this hearing and reintroduce the exact same bill—one that clearly reflects the opinions of only one side in this debate?