[BOAI] Re: Like its Harvard model, Princeton OA Policy needs to add immediate-deposit requirement, with no waiver option

Mon Oct 3 08:03:29 BST 2011

some clarifications from Really, what has Princeton
done?<http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2011/09/30/really-what-has-princeton-done/>
*By Kevin Smith,
J.D<http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/author/ksmithl2duke-edu/>
*, Duke University’s Scholarly Communications Officer:

"In all such policies the university is given a license in the works that is
prior to any copyright transfer to a publisher.  Technically, therefore, the
rights that are transferred are subject to that license...The differences
amongst universities regarding these policies come in implementation.  Some
universities may elect to act in a way that is contrary to the terms of the
publication agreements the authors enter into (by posting articles or
versions of articles where the publication agreement purports not to permit
the specific posting).  Doing so would seem to be legally permissible under
the claim of a prior license, but it could also put the faculty members in a
difficult position unless they are very careful about what they sign (as
they should be but seldom are).  An alternative is for the university to
exercise the license in a more nuanced way, taking into account the various
publisher policies as much as possible.  That, of course, makes open access
repositories much more labor-intensive and difficult, especially as
publishers change their policies to try a thwart these expressions of
authorial rights<http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2011/07/07/what-a-mess/>.
How Princeton will actually implement its policy is still an open
question...

Probably the most important fact about these policies, indeed, is that they
represent an assertion of authorial control.  We so often hear publishers
and others in the content industry talk about protecting copyright, by which
they usually mean the rights they hold by assignment from a creator, that it
is salutary to remind academics that *they* own copyright in their
scholarship from the moment their original expression is fixed in tangible
form.  Transferring those rights to a publisher is one option they have, and
it has become a tradition.  But it is only one option, and the tradition is
beginning to be questioned, as this recent article from Times Higher
Education<http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=417576&c=1>and
this
one from Inside Higher
Ed<http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/09/30/planned_obsolescence_by_kathleen_fitzpatrick_proposes_alternatives_to_outmoded_academic_journals>forcibly
demonstrate.
<http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=417576&c=1>

Open access policies are not, at their root, either “land grabs” by
institutions or acts of defiance aimed at publishers.  They are simply a
recognition of the fact that authors are the initial owners of copyright,
and they express a desire by those owners to manage their rights
intentionally and in a way that most clearly benefits the goals of
scholarship."
(
http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2011/09/30/really-what-has-princeton-done/
)

On 2 October 2011 16:36, P. Kangueane PhD <kangueane at bioinformation.net>wrote:

> Interesting question and it should be thought deeply.
>
> Kangueane
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boai-forum-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk
> [mailto:boai-forum-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Allen Kleiman
> Sent: Sunday, 2 October, 2011 4:55 AM
> To: boai-forum at ecs.soton.ac.uk; liblicense-l at lists.yale.edu
> Cc: 'American Scientist Open Access Forum'
> Subject: [BOAI] Re: Like its Harvard model,Princeton OA Policy needs to add
> immediate-deposit requirement,with no waiver option
> Importance: High
>
> I believe that the 'copyright' means nothing without the 'publishing'
> rights.
>
> Is this right?
>
> Allen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boai-forum-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk
> [mailto:boai-forum-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad
> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2011 9:16 AM
> To: liblicense-l at lists.yale.edu
> Cc: American Scientist Open Access Forum
> Subject: [BOAI] Like its Harvard model, Princeton OA Policy needs to add
> immediate-deposit requirement, with no waiver option
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Rick Anderson <rick.anderson at utah.edu>
> wrote:
> >>This information comes courtesy of the IFLA copyright programme.=20
> >>Are Princeton's essentially the same terms/conditions as the=20
> >>Harvard Mandate?
> >
> > It looks like this is indeed just another non-mandatory=20 "mandate."
> > The language about each faculty member automatically=20 granting
> > Princeton a non-exclusive license to "exercise any and=20 all
> > copyrights in his or her scholarly articles published in any=20
> > medium," etc., is then followed by this important qualifier:=20 "Upon
> > the express direction of a Faculty member, the Provost or=20 the
> > Provost=B9s designate will waive or suspend application of this=20
> > license for a particular article authored or co-authored by that=20
> > Faculty member."
> >
> > So in other words, it's not an OA mandate, but rather an OA=20
> > "mandate." You're bound by it unless you ask not to be, in which=20
> > case you're not.
>
> 1. First, congratulations to Princeton University (my graduate alma
> mater!) for adopting an open access mandate: a copyright-reservation
> policy,
> adopted by unanimous faculty vote.
> http://roarmap.eprints.org/520/
>
> 2. Princeton is following in the footsteps of Harvard in adopting the
> copyright-reservation policy pioneered by Stuart Shieber and Peter Suber.
> http://roarmap.eprints.org/75/
>
> 4. I hope that Princeton will now also follow in the footsteps of Harvard
> by
> adding an immediate-deposit requirement with no waiver option to its
> copyright-reservation mandate, as Harvard has done.
> http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/545-guid.html
>
> 5. The Princeton copyright-reservation policy, like the Harvard
> copyright-reservation policy, can be waived if the author wishes: This is
> to
> allow authors to retain the freedom to choose where to publish, even if the
> journal does not agree to the copyright-reservation.
>
> 6. Adding an immediate-deposit clause, with no opt-out waiver option,
> retains all the properties and benefits of the copyright-reservation policy
> while ensuring that all articles are nevertheless deposited in the
> institutional repository upon publication, with no exceptions:
> Access to the deposited article can be embargoed, but deposit itself
> cannot;
> access is a copyright matter, deposit is not.
> http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/364-guid.html
>
> 7. Depositing all articles upon publication, without exception, is crucial
> to reaching 100% open access with certainty, and as soon as possible; hence
> it is the right example to set for the many other universities worldwide
> that are now contemplating emulating Harvard and Princeton by adopting open
> access policies of their own; copyright reservation alone, with opt-out, is
> not.
> http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/494-guid.html
>
> 8. The reason it is imperative that the deposit clause must be immediate
> and
> without a waiver option is that, without that, both when and whether
> articles are deposited at all is indeterminate: With the added deposit
> requirement the policy is a mandate; without it, it is just a
> gentleman/scholar's agreement.
>
> [Footnote: Princeton's open access policy is also unusual in having been
> adopted before Princeton has created an open access repository for its
> authors to deposit in: It might be a good idea to create the repository as
> soon as possible so Princeton authors can get into the habit of practising
> what they pledge from the outset...]
>
> Stevan Harnad
> EnablingOpenScholarship
> http://www.openscholarship.org/
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
> http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
> http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f
>
>
> --
> 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/20111003/6e9514b4/attachment-0001.html 