[GOAL] Is It True That It's Illegal To Mandate Green OA Self-Archiving in Germany?

[Stevan Harnad]

We have heard it repeatedly
claimed<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#hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=active&tbm=blg&sclient=psy-ab&q=(german+OR+germany)+(Copyright+OR+freedom+OR+legal+OR+freedom)+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&oq=(german+OR+germany)+(Copyright+OR+freedom+OR+legal+OR+freedom)+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&gs_l=serp.12...30593.32815.3.35597.11.11.0.0.0.3.350.1283.5j4j0j1.10.0.les%3B..0.1...1c.1.WkMCZbfWLzU&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=3021f0429232a004&bpcl=38625945&biw=1263&bih=683>,
without evidence or argument, that in Germany it would be
illegal<https://plus.google.com/u/0/109377556796183035206/posts/drJqNn5oZNy>
to
mandate that authors self-archive their final drafts of peer-reviewed
articles because it would be a "violation of academic freedom."

I have never believed this claim, and do not even think it is coherent.

A Green OA self-archiving mandate leaves authors free to publish whatever
they wish and to publish it in whatever journal they wish. It merely
requires them to deposit the final, accepted draft in an institutional
repository.

(Most Green OA mandates don't even require the deposit to be made OA
immediately: they allow it to be left in Closed Access during a publisher
embargo period: About 60% of journals do not have OA embargoes; 40% have
embargoes of from 6-12 months to several years or more.)

Hence the requirement to deposit is merely an administrative mandate --
like requiring that publications be submitted electronically rather than on
paper, for performance evaluation. (Was that a violation of academic
freedom in Germany too?)

The "illegal in Germany" claim has been made over and over, in and about
Germany. It invariably turns out to be based on the incorrect assumption
that it entails putting a constraint on authors' academic freedom. Instead
of just repeating the claim, like hearsay, endlessly, I urge advocates and
opponents of OA alike to first get it clear in their minds exactly what a
Green OA self-archiving mandate mandates, and then to state explicitly how
or why it violates authors' academic freedom.

But be careful not to conflate Green OA self-archiving mandates with Gold
OA publishing mandates: The latter would require authors to publish in Gold
OA journals rather than their journals of choice; or they would forbid
authors to publish in journals that embargo Green OA. Such mandates would
indeed be constraining authors' academic freedom.

But Gold OA publishing is not what most OA mandates require. They just
require Green OA self-archiving. (See ROARMAP <http://roarmap.eprints.org/> --
and you will see that there are already some Green OA mandates in Germany.)

Stevan Harnad

Further discussion:
http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/959-.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20121126/67dc4444/attachment.html