[BOAI] Re: Princeton bans academics from

[Peter Suber]

The word "bans" in the headline below is deeply misleading.  See my comment
on Google+ (which I'm using as a blog substitute nowadays).
https://plus.google.com/109377556796183035206/posts/FUoCHXVJHSg

Also see the better coverage by Andrew Appel at Princeton's Center for
Information Technology Policy.
https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/appel/open-access-scholarly-publications-princeton

     Best,
     Peter

Peter Suber
Berkman Fellow, Harvard University
Senior Researcher, SPARC
bit.ly/suber-gplus


On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Carolina Rossini <
carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > 28 September 2011
> > Princeton bans academics from handing all copyright to journal publishers
> > Sunanda Creagh
> >
> >
> http://theconversation.edu.au/princeton-bans-academics-from-handing-all-copyright-to-journal-publishers-3596
> >
> > Prestigious US academic institution Princeton University has banned
> > researchers from giving the copyright of scholarly articles to journal
> > publishers, except in certain cases where a waiver may be granted. The
> > new rule is part of an Open Access policy aimed at broadening the
> > reach of their scholarly…
> >
> > Princeton Princeton University hopes its new Open Access policy will
> > pressure academic publishers to stop requiring the copyright to the
> > papers they publish. Flickr/Yakinodi
> >
> > Prestigious US academic institution Princeton University has banned
> > researchers from giving the copyright of scholarly articles to journal
> > publishers, except in certain cases where a waiver may be granted.
> >
> > The new rule is part of an Open Access policy aimed at broadening the
> > reach of their scholarly work and encouraging publishers to adjust
> > standard contracts that commonly require exclusive copyright as a
> > condition of publication.
> >
> > Universities pay millions of dollars a year for academic journal
> > subscriptions. People without subscriptions, which can cost up to
> > $25,000 a year for some journals or hundreds of dollars for a single
> > issue, are often prevented from reading taxpayer funded research.
> > Individual articles are also commonly locked behind pay walls.
> >
> > Researchers and peer reviewers are not paid for their work but
> > academic publishers have said such a business model is required to
> > maintain quality.
> >
> > At a September 19 meeting, Princeton’s Faculty Advisory Committee on
> > Policy adopted a new open access policy that gives the university the
> > “nonexclusive right to make available copies of scholarly articles
> > written by its faculty, unless a professor specifically requests a
> > waiver for particular articles.”
> >
> > “The University authorizes professors to post copies of their articles
> > on their own web sites or on University web sites, or in other
> > not-for-a-fee venues,” the policy said.
> >
> > “The main effect of this new policy is to prevent them from giving
> > away all their rights when they publish in a journal.”
> >
> > Under the policy, academic staff will grant to The Trustees of
> > Princeton University “a nonexclusive, irrevocable, worldwide license
> > to exercise any and all copyrights in his or her scholarly articles
> > published in any medium, whether now known or later invented, provided
> > the articles are not sold by the University for a profit, and to
> > authorise others to do the same.”
> >
> > In cases where the journal refuses to publish their article without
> > the academic handing all copyright to the publisher, the academic can
> > seek a waiver from the open access policy from the University.
> >
> > The policy authors acknowledged that this may make the rule toothless
> > in practice but said open access policies can be used “to lean on the
> > journals to adjust their standard contracts so that waivers are not
> > required, or with a limited waiver that simply delays open access for
> > a few months.”
> >
> > Academics will also be encouraged to place their work in open access
> > data stores such as Arxiv or campus-run data repositories.
> > A step forward
> >
> > Having prestigious universities such as Princeton and Harvard fly the
> > open access flag represented a step forward, said open access advocate
> > Professor Simon Marginson from the University of Melbourne’s Centre
> > for the Study of Higher Education.
> >
> > “The achievement of free knowledge flows, and installation of open
> > access publishing on the web as the primary form of publishing rather
> > than oligopolistic journal publishing subject to price barriers, now
> > depends on whether this movement spreads further among the peak
> > research and scholarly institutions,” he said.
> >
> > “Essentially, this approach – if it becomes general – normalises an
> > open access regime and offers authors the option of opting out of that
> > regime. This is a large improvement on the present position whereby
> > copyright restrictions and price barriers are normal and authors have
> > to attempt to opt in to open access publishing, or risk prosecution by
> > posting their work in breach of copyright.”
> >
> > “The only interests that lose out under the Princeton proposal are the
> > big journal publishers. Everyone else gains.”
> >
> > Professor Tom Cochrane, Deputy Vice-Chancellor Technology, Information
> > and Learning Support at the Queensland University of Technology, who
> > has also led an Open Access policy mandate at QUT welcomed Princeton’s
> > new rule but warned that the waiver must not be used too regularly,
> > lest the policy be undermined.
> >
> > If all universities and research institutions globally had policies
> > similar to Princeton’s, the ultimate owner of published academic work
> > would be universities and their research communities collectively,
> > Professor Cochrane said.
> >
> > “They are the source of all the content that publishers absolutely
> > require to run their business model,” he said.
> >
> > Dr Danny Kingsley, an open access expert and Manager of Scholarly
> > Communication and ePublishing at Australian National University said
> > the move was a positive step and that the push for open access should
> > come from the academic community.
> >
> > In practice, however, the new policy requires staff have a good
> > understanding of the copyright arrangements they currently have with
> > journal publishers in their field.
> >
> > They will need to ensure future publisher’s agreements accommodate the
> > new position and if not, obtain a waiver from the University.
> >
> > “This sounds easy but in reality might be a challenge for some
> > academics. There is considerable evidence to show that academics often
> > have very little understanding of the copyright situation of their
> > published work,” she said.
> >
> > “What will be most telling will be the publishers' response over the
> > next year or so. If they start providing amended agreements to
> > Princeton academics then the door will be open for other universities
> > to follow this lead. I suspect however they will not, as generally the
> > trend seems for publishers to make the open access path a complex and
> > difficult one.”
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
> http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/boai-forum/attachments/20110928/ac5d06fa/attachment.html