Kraven från många lärosäten att forskarna ska deponera sina manuskript
till publicerade artiklar
i dom lokala arkiven är uppenbarligen en björntjänst och en i grunden
felaktig strategi.
Styrgruppen för programmet OpenAccess.se har antagit ett uttalande om Elseviers
ändrade policy för parallellpublicering.
http://www.kb.se/dokument/Om/projekt/open_access/2011/Stallntag_Elsevier_OA-styrgrupp_SVE%20_fin.pdf
På hemsidan skriver man
Styrgruppen för OpenAccess.se har antagit ett uttalande om Elseviers
ändrade policy för parallellpublicering.
I uttalandet vänder sig styrgruppen starkt emot Elseviers nya krav vad
gäller på separata avtal om författarrättigheter och uppmanar Elsevier
att släppa detta krav. Styrgruppen rekommenderar vidare svenska
lärosäten med open access-krav att inte ingå särskilda lokala avtal
med Elsevier, utan istället hänvisa frågan till diskussioner inom
ramen för det nationella licensavtalet med Elsevier.
Elsevier kräver särskilda avtal med lärosätet
Elsevier tillåter att författare lägger ut en kopia av sin artikel på
en egen webbsida eller i ett öppet arkiv. Nu säger man att detta inte
gäller om det finns ett open access-krav att lägga ut artiklar i ett
specifikt öppet arkiv. Då kräver Elsevier ett särskilt avtal med
lärosätet eller forskningsfinansiären, vilket kan innebära att
tillgängligheten dröjer.
Kraven skapar osäkerhet om författares rättigheter
Elseviers nya policy berör, enligt styrgruppens tolkning, enbart de
lärosäten som kräver att forskarna ska göra sina artiklar fritt
tillgängliga i lärosätets öppna arkiv. Däremot berörs inte svenska
forskningsfinansiärer med open access-krav, eftersom de inte kräver
att man lägger ut artiklar i något specifikt öppet arkiv.
Styrgruppen för OpenAccess.se beklagar Elseviers försämrade villkor
och känner också oro över att Elseviers krav skapar osäkerhet om
författares rättigheter angående parallellpublicering.
http://www.kb.se/openaccess/nyheter/2011/Nej-till-Elsevier-krav-pa-separata-avtal-om-parallellpublicering-/
Jan
2011/6/25 Jan Szczepanski <[log in to unmask]>:
> vidarebefordras till intresserade av open access
>
>
> Jan
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF) <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 2011/6/25
> Subject: Elsevier response to OpenAccess.se statement
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> At Elsevier we have noted the statement issued by the Steering
> Committee for OpenAccess.SE following its meeting on 23 May, and
> would welcome the opportunity to clarify some items and respond.
> First, let me say that we have always welcomed the opportunity
> for dialogue with the Steering Committee. Indeed, we have worked
> successfully in partnership with many organisations that share
> our vision for universal access to information of high-quality
> and in ways sustainable for all stakeholders in scholarly
> communications
>
> We would like to clarify that Elsevier's posting policy is not in
> fact new, although we have been making a very conscious efforts
> to communicate it more clearly in recent months. The policy
> supports our vision of universal access to high-quality
> information in the following ways:
>
> *Our journal authors are able to use copies of their articles in
> a broad variety of ways. For example authors can make copies of
> their article for personal use, for their own classroom teaching
> use, to distribute or email to research colleagues and for the
> personal use of those colleagues, to distribute to delegates at
> meetings, to post a pre-print on websites and pre-print servers,
> and to post voluntarily the accepted manuscript version on a
> personal or institutional web site or server for scholarly
> purposes. (More details are available at
> www.elsevier.com/access/). Our usage policies are among the most
> responsive to author needs in the STM publishing industry.
>
> *We believe the voluntary posting of manuscripts is an acceptable
> practice for authors, and that both institutions and publishers
> should respect their choices. The systematic posting of
> manuscripts, for example because of a mandate to post, is only
> agreeable if done in ways that are sustainable for the underlying
> journal.
>
> *Our first systematic posting agreements have been with funding
> bodies and date back to 2005. Authors funded by organizations
> such as Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) and NIH could not
> have complied with the systematic posting policies of these
> funding bodies under the terms of our voluntary posting policy,
> so we created agreements or arrangements with those funders to
> enable authors to comply in ways that we believed would be
> sustainable.
>
> *Embargo periods are a feature of these agreements or
> arrangements. The embargo periods are journal specific and
> differ according to the varied usage patterns that exist across
> science and social science areas. A high percentage of these are
> for a 12 month period, predominantly in life and health sciences,
> but in other areas such as mathematics and social sciences longer
> embargo periods of typically 24 or 36 months are necessary to
> ensure the sustainability of the underlying journals.
>
> *During the period when the embargo period would apply to posted
> manuscripts there is wide availability of articles. 93% of
> researchers surveyed in academic institutions reported that they
> are satisfied with access to research information in journal
> articles (Access vs. Importance, A global study assessing the
> importance of and ease of access to professional and academic
> information Phase I Results, Publishing Research Consortium,
> October 2010 - 4,109 respondents). However we are not complacent
> with even this great result, and systematically identify and
> close access gaps in sustainable ways through programmes such as
> Research4Life which provides free and very low cost access to
> researchers in the world's poorest countries. We also have an
> extremely active program of pilots to provide innovative access
> services to members of the public, patients and their families,
> people working in small and medium sized businesses, students,
> etc.
>
> We believe that author rights agreements and subscription
> agreements should be kept separate, but we are of course very
> happy to talk with BIBSAM or other organizations in Sweden (and,
> indeed, elsewhere) about either topic. Please note that as our
> early systematic posting agreements have been with funding
> bodies, we are still in test-and-learn mode for institutional
> agreements. We are therefore currently running a pilot program
> and would be willing to work with a small number of Swedish
> institutions as part of this program.
>
> Organizations that need but do not yet have, or do not want, a
> systematic posting agreement are asked to work with us to
> minimize unauthorized distribution and use of journal article, in
> line with the following Elsevier policies:
>
> *www.elsevier.com/copyright
>
> *www.elsevier.com/postingpolicy
>
> We understand the role that public access to research can have in
> enabling society to progress, and we're always happy to work with
> research institutions to find ways of achieving access objectives
> in sustainable ways.
>
> With best wishes,
>
> Alicia
>
> Dr Alicia Wise
> Director of Universal Access
> Elsevier
> I E: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ingegerd Rabow
> Sent: 24 June 2011 12:02
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Sciecom info June 2011
>
> Welcome to the June 2011 issue of ScieCom info. Nordic-Baltic
> Forum for Scientific Communication.
>
> There has been a lot of international concern about Elsevier's
> recently changed Open Access Policy. We can now publish a formal
> statement made by the Swedish national OpenAccess.se programme,
> run by the Swedish National Library to promote OA to research
> results produced by Swedish researchers. The Steering Committee
> is deeply concerned about any changes that restrict availability
> and strongly objects to Elsevier's new policy. "OpenAccess.se
> Statement: Concern about Elsevier's Open Access Policy."
> http://nile.lub.lu.se/ojs/index.php/sciecominfo/article/view/5146/4608
>
> An Open Access Policy has now been adopted by the Karolinska
> Institute (KI), Stockholm. The Policy will be in effect from July
> 1, 2011. KI encourages its researchers to make their publications
> to the greatest possible extent freely available, taking into
> account publisher terms and relevant demands of grant-awarding
> bodies and government authorities. es. Read KI's Open access
> Policy here.
> http://nile.lub.lu.se/ojs/index.php/sciecominfo/article/view/5146/4608
>
> The DOAJ team in Lund is happy to announce that the DOAJ site is
> now available in French. Other languages will follow.
> http://nile.lub.lu.se/ojs/index.php/sciecominfo/article/view/5146/4608
>
> Will the more mundane communication channels have any roles in
> scholarly publishing? Will they seriously challenge the old
> academic publishing traditions? We hope to inspire lively
> discussions with the article "Taking new routes: Blogs, Web
> sites, and Scientific Publishing "by Helena Bukvova, a researcher
> and lecturer at the Dresden University of Technology. Helena
> Bukova presents several new aspects of web usage for researchers.
> http://nile.lub.lu.se/ojs/index.php/sciecominfo/article/view/5148
>
> We continue to follow the promising OA developments in Denmark.
> Lise Mikkelsen has earlier reported on the hearing process for
> the first draft of the "Recommendations for implementation of
> Open Access in Denmark". The final version has now been released.
> In "Central Open Access activities in Denmark" Lise Mikkelsen
> takes us through the key events related to the final
> Recommendations, and presents some of the main areas in the
> Danish Open Access Committee's final recommendations for
> implementing a national OA-policy in Denmark.
> http://nile.lub.lu.se/ojs/index.php/sciecominfo/article/view/5149
>
> "Promote a national open access policy and create the necessary
> conditions for an efficient implementation of it" is one of the
> most important goals for the new strategy recently adopted by the
> Steering Committee for the Swedish OpenAccess.se programme. The
> main purpose of the Programme is to help increasing the share of
> freely available research publications on the Internet. "Strategy
> for the OpenAccess.se programme 2011-2013" was adopted at the
> Committee's May 23rd meeting. The new strategy also defines
> goals for specific areas as well as the means to reach them.
> http://nile.lub.lu.se/ojs/index.php/sciecominfo/article/view/5150
>
> Jan Erik Frantsvag has earlier presented, "The Open Access
> publication fund at the University of Tromso". His colleague Leif
> Longva now reports on "Doctoral theses are now submitted
> electronically at the University of Tromso". It all started in
> late 2007, when an electronic submission portal for master theses
> was introduced. The great success of this portal led them to
> consider doing the same for doctoral these. They had been
> surprised to notice that doctoral candidates were reluctant to
> include their theses in the Munin open archive. Encouraged by the
> earlier success the library launched a similar service for
> doctoral theses.
> http://nile.lub.lu.se/ojs/index.php/sciecominfo/article/view/5151
>
> We hope that you will have a god read. Your comments and ideas
> are very welcome
>
> Ingegerd Rabow
> Editor-in-chief
> ScieCom info
> http://www.sciecom.org/sciecominfo
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jan Szczepanski
> Övre Olskroksgatan 20
> 416 67 Göteborg
> Tel: 041 - 19 68 72
> E-post: [log in to unmask]
>
--
Jan Szczepanski
Övre Olskroksgatan 20
416 67 Göteborg
Tel: 041 - 19 68 72
E-post: [log in to unmask]
|
