<html>
<body>
<font size=3>[Forwarding from Fred Friend via the JISC-Repositories
list. --Peter Suber.]<br><br>
<br>
To all repository managers:<br>
<br>
Rumours are spreading that Elsevier staff are approaching UK
Vice-Chancellors persuading them to point to PDF copies of articles on
Elsevier's web-site rather than have the articles deposited in
institutional repositories. It appears that the argument being used is
that this will be a cheaper option than maintaining full-text within
repositories. If these reports are true, my guess is that Elsevier are
using these arguments to undermine deposit mandates. If Vice-Chancellors
are persuaded to adopt this policy, it would only give repository access
to an unsatisfactory version (PDFs will not enable re-use for research
purposes) and access on Elsevier's terms. If this is Elsevier's strategy
it would seem to negate their "green" status. Previous
correspondence on this list has indicated a harder line on repository
deposit by Wiley-Blackwell, and if Elsevier are also hardening their
policy, mandates for repository deposit could lose much of their
potential effectiveness in increasing access to research content. <br>
<br>
It would be wise for repository managers to brief their senior university
management on this issue. The threat to repository deposit also adds to
the need for authors to be briefed on the use of a licence to publish
retaining certain rights rather than ceding all control over their work
to the publisher.<br>
<br>
Any publishers reading this message should understand that dialogue on
the issues above will be welcome, in particular clarification of any
change in publisher policies. <br>
<br>
Fred Friend (not writing on behalf of any organisation or
institution) <br>
</font></body>
</html>