<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra">On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 5:10 PM, BISSET J. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:james.bisset@durham.ac.uk" target="_blank">james.bisset@durham.ac.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote">
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div><div>
</div>
<div>From our understanding of Elsevier policy this is not the case in two instances:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1) if the institution requires deposit in their institutional repository</div>
<div>2) if the funder requires open access.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>Dear James,</div><div style><br></div><div style>Elsevier rights agreements state that authors retains the right to make their final drafts OA immediately upon publication: no embargo.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>I will answer your more detailed questions below, but let me already give you a simple general answer from which all the specific ones can be deduced.</div><div style><br></div><div style>If a contract says <i>you have the right to do X</i>, then it cannot go on to stipulate that you only have the "<i>right to exercise"</i> your right to do X if you are not required to exercise it. That is <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#q=elsevier+double-talk+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=active&hl=en&tbm=blg&tbas=0&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=VpiBUeBI08fSAc-pgaAM&ved=0CBsQpwUoAA&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45921128,d.dmQ&fp=1dc003e2610cd254&biw=1181&bih=708">empty double-talk,</a> and can and should be completely ignored as empty. A right is a right; you either have it or you don't.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Moreover, Elsevier authors do not need Elsevier's permission to <i>deposit</i> in their IRs any more than they need Elsevier's permission to go to the WC! </div><div style><br></div>
<div style>The only thing at issue is <i>the right to make the deposit immediately OA (i.e., free online)</i>. And Elsevier (like Springer, and about 60% of all publishers) state that the author retains the right to make the final draft OA immediately upon publication: no OA embargo.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>So all authors with any sense should go ahead and exercise that formally endorsed right that they retain!</div><div style><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>I have an email from Elsevier today confirming that in either of the two cases above, immediate deposit is permitted but open access is not permitted until [after] an embargo period...<br></div></div></blockquote><div>
<br></div><div style>Elsevier is just playing on words here. As I said, the right to <i>deposit</i> is not at issue. Elsevier does not have any say over where I put my final draft. </div><div style><br></div><div style>The only right at issue is <i>the right to make the deposit immediately OA (i.e., free online)</i>.<br>
</div><div style><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div></div>
<div>Additionally, Durham has reissued its mandate for self-archiving, including a requirement that only those deposited (not necessarily open access) can be used for consideration in promotion or probation (the 'how' this will work us still being looked at
- So this has not yet been registered anywhere).<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>Bravo on adopting the optimal institutional OA mandate. Soon we can hope that the Durham mandate will be reinforced by the very same mandate from <a href="http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/rinfrastruct/openaccess/">HEFCE/REF</a>: only articles whose final drafts were deposited in the author's institutional repository immediately upon acceptance for publication will be eligible for submission to the next REF (2020).</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Institutional and HEFCE immediate-deposit mandates can then mutually reinforce one another, and institutions will be able to devise a <a href="http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1004-Harnad-Follow-Up-Comments-to-BIS-Select-Committee-on-Open-Access.html">simple mechanism for monitoring and verifying compliance</a>.</div>
<div style> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div></div>
<div>Because we now mandate deposit, Elsevier have indicated we cannot make any publications open access until we sign an agreement with them - which includes restricting access from immediate upon publication (as it was without a mandate) to the embargo periods
mentioned above.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>This is very interesting: Have you asked yourself <i>why</i> Elsevier is asking for a second agreement? Isn't the author's signed agreement enough, if it is really sufficient to accord him a right yet prevent him from exercising that right?</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Well obviously not, because of the double-talk I just mentioned. In an agreement with the clause</div><div style><br></div></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px">
<div class="gmail_extra" style><div class="gmail_quote" style><div style><b>Clause C1:</b> "<i>You retain the right to do X</i>" </div></div></div></blockquote><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div style>
<br></div><div style>followed by the clause </div><div style><br></div></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div class="gmail_extra" style><div class="gmail_quote" style><div style>
<b>Clause C2: </b>"<i>but you may not "exercise your right" to do X if you are required to do X</i>"</div></div></div></blockquote><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div style><br></div>
<div style>you are sanctioning a contradiction. Logically speaking (and contracts must obey logic as surely as they must obey the law), this is pretty much the same as simply saying:</div><div style><br></div></div></div>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div class="gmail_extra" style><div class="gmail_quote" style><div style><b>Clause C1:</b> "<i>You may do X</i>" </div></div></div></blockquote>
<div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div style><br></div><div style>and</div><div style><br></div></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div class="gmail_extra" style>
<div class="gmail_quote" style><div style><b>Clause C2: </b>"<i>You may not do X</i>."</div></div></div></blockquote><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div style><br></div><div style>With a logical contradiction, you can pretty much take your choice and do whatever you like, because anything (and the opposite of anything) follows from a contradiction.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>A good choice would be to read sequentially, follow Clause 1, and simply ignore Clause 2, which just says the opposite. If challenged, cite clause 1.</div><div style><br></div><div style>And this is the real reason that Elsevier is not comfortable with relying on its signed author rights agreement with its authors as grounds for restraining them form doing what the retain the right to do if they are required to do it. So they instead try to get a signature to yet another agreement, from yet another party -- the university -- a further agreement tjat would have the (failed) intended effect of the author rights agreement: <i>The institution must sign that it may not require the author to exercise his right to provide immediate OA.</i></div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Solution? Simple: The university should not sign! </div><div style><br></div><div style>If Elsevier really thinks its author agreement has already seen to it that mandated authors may not provide immediate OA if required by his university, then there is no call for the university to sign a thing.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Of course, this is not quite the way Elsevier goes about trying to get the university to sign: It proposes a contingency, in confidential pricing negotiations, between the subscription deal it offers the university, and whether or not they require immediate OA.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>This would be unethical if it weren't so ludicrous.</div><div style><br></div><div style>Of course the university should not sign away its right to mandate immediate-deposit because of a subscription-deal contingency.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>But the solution is even simpler than that. Not only should the university not sign any agreement with Elsevier over what it may or may not require its researchers do, but the university should not worry too much about embargoes; it should simply implement the "Almost OA" <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#q=Button+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=active&tbm=blg&tbas=0&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=HnU5UcDCFIyq0AGWhIHQAw&ved=0CBwQpwUoAA&fp=1&biw=1288&bih=758&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&cad=b&sei=5KGBUb2GD6Pm0gGa24HoDw">email-eprint-request Button</a>.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>That way not only will the university's immediate-deposit mandate (with the help of the HEFCE/REF immediate-deposit mandate) ensure that all final drafts are immediately deposited and that at least 60% of those immediate-deposits (including all Elsevier deposits!) will be made immediately OA. But, in addition, even the those immediate-deposits that are from from the 40% of journals -- which (unlike Springer and Elsevier and APS and IOP and all the other publishers who are on the Side if the angels) try to embargo OA -- will be made "Almost OA", via the Button.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>And with the help of the eprint Button, the ID/OA mandate will go on to make OA embargoes as ineffectual as Clause 2, once the immediate-deposit mandate becomes universal.<br></div><div style>
<br></div><div style>And a word about "systematicity": Systematically duplicating the contents of a journal would mean duplicating all of its contents. But a single institution just provides a tiny (and unsystematic) fraction of any journal's contents.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Globally mandated OA will be another story: But Elsevier cannot hope to persuade all universities worldwide to desist from mandating OA! (And it is noteworthy that Elsevier is not even trying to get research funders to sign "agreements" not mandate OA, or to extend OA embargoes; Elsevier's strategy there is lobbying, since they don't have the subscription discount carrot with which it lures naive universities into signing over their mandating rights in exchange for a better subscription Big-Deal.</div>
<div style><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div></div>
<div>However, if Alicia is indicating this new stance is a move away from that which I was told by Elsevier earlier today, and is still less than clearly indicated on their web pages (which indicate an author can comply by self-archiving, but then go on to
list embargo periods which do not meet RCUK policy) then that is great news.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>Alicia is just re-stating the Clause 1. Take her at her word.</div><div style><br></div>
<div style>Best wishes,</div><div style><br></div><div style>Stevan </div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div><div>
On 1 May 2013, at 14:49, "Stevan Harnad" <<a href="mailto:amsciforum@gmail.com" target="_blank">amsciforum@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<div></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:'Helvetica Neue',Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:18px;background-color:rgb(246,246,246)">
<a href="https://twitter.com/wisealic" style="color:rgb(153,153,153);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><strong style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">Alicia Wise</strong> <span style="font-size:12px;direction:ltr"><s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(187,187,187)">@</s><b>wisealic</b></span></a><small style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(187,187,187);float:right;margin-top:1px"><a href="https://twitter.com/wisealic/status/329287890641252352" title="12:35 PM - 30 Apr 13" style="color:rgb(153,153,153);text-decoration:none" target="_blank">20h</a></small></div>
<p style="margin:0px;word-wrap:break-word;white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:'Helvetica Neue',Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:18px;background-color:rgb(246,246,246)">
<a href="https://twitter.com/AmSciForum" dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(128,226,147)">@</s><b>AmSciForum</b></a> Stevan - Elsevier's
<a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23oa&src=hash" dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none" target="_blank">
<s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(128,226,147)">#</s><b>oa</b></a> agreement with RCUK, including gold & green options, is described here:<a href="http://t.co/s8faOyHfEE" title="http://www.elsevier.com/about/publishing-guidelines/policies/funding-body-agreements/research-councils-uk" dir="ltr" rel="nofollow" style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none;font-size:0px;line-height:0">
http://www.</span><span style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none">elsevier.com/about/publishi</span><span style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none;font-size:0px;line-height:0">ng-guidelines/policies/funding-body-agreements/research-councils-uk</span><span style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none"><span style="font-size:0px;line-height:0"> </span>…</span></a></p>
<p style="margin:0px;word-wrap:break-word;white-space:pre-wrap;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:'Helvetica Neue',Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;line-height:18px;background-color:rgb(246,246,246)">
</p>
<div style="white-space:normal"><a href="https://twitter.com/AmSciForum" style="color:rgb(153,153,153);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><strong style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">Stevan Harnad</strong> <span style="font-size:12px;direction:ltr"><s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(187,187,187)">@</s><b>AmSciForum</b></span></a><small style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(187,187,187);float:right;margin-top:1px"><a href="https://twitter.com/AmSciForum/status/329457762482397185" title="11:50 PM - 30 Apr 13" style="color:rgb(153,153,153);text-decoration:none" target="_blank">8h</a></small></div>
<p style="margin:0px;word-wrap:break-word"><a href="https://twitter.com/wisealic" dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(128,226,147)">@</s><b>wisealic</b></a> Simple Question:
Is/isn't Elsevier-like Springer-still Green on immediate, unembargoed <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23oa&src=hash" dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none" target="_blank">
<s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(128,226,147)">#</s><b>oa</b></a> self-archiving?
<a href="http://t.co/Jd0DTucqng" title="http://j.mp/11B5gcg" dir="ltr" rel="nofollow" style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"> <span style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none;font-size:0px;line-height:0">http://</span><span style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none">j.mp/11B5gcg</span><font color="#2ccf4c"><span style="font-size:0px;line-height:0"></span></font><span style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none"><span style="font-size:0px;line-height:0"> </span></span></a></p>
<p style="margin:0px;word-wrap:break-word"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin:0px;word-wrap:break-word"></p>
<div style="white-space:normal"><a href="https://twitter.com/wisealic" style="color:rgb(153,153,153);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><strong style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">Alicia Wise</strong> <span style="font-size:12px;direction:ltr"><s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(187,187,187)">@</s><b>wisealic</b></span></a><small style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(187,187,187);float:right;margin-top:1px"><a href="https://twitter.com/wisealic/status/329587843716509696" title="8:27 AM - 1 May 13" style="color:rgb(153,153,153);text-decoration:none" target="_blank">19m</a></small></div>
<p style="margin:0px;word-wrap:break-word"><a href="https://twitter.com/AmSciForum" dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(128,226,147)">@</s><b>AmSciForum</b></a> <b>yes, Elsevier
endorses immediate self-archiving of accepted final drafts free for all on the web immediately upon acceptance.</b></p>
<p style="margin:0px;word-wrap:break-word"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin:0px;word-wrap:break-word"></p>
<div style="white-space:normal">
<div><a href="https://twitter.com/AmSciForum" style="color:rgb(153,153,153);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><strong style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">Stevan Harnad</strong> <span style="font-size:12px;direction:ltr"><s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(187,187,187)">@</s><b>AmSciForum</b></span></a><small style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(187,187,187);float:right;margin-top:1px"><a href="https://twitter.com/AmSciForum/status/329591992843640833" title="8:43 AM - 1 May 13" style="color:rgb(153,153,153);text-decoration:none" target="_blank">3m</a></small></div>
<p style="margin:0px;word-wrap:break-word;white-space:pre-wrap"><a href="https://twitter.com/wisealic" dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none" target="_blank"><s style="text-decoration:none;color:rgb(128,226,147)">@</s><b>wisealic</b></a>
Thanks Alicia. Then Elsevier remains on Side of the Angels & I will continue to attest to that!
<a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23oa&src=hash" dir="ltr" style="color:rgb(44,207,76);text-decoration:none" target="_blank">
</a></p></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>