[GOAL] Re: Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu

[Heather Morrison]

I argue that the problem here is not green open access. It's Elsevier. Even their version of CC-BY (with exclusive license to publish) does not resolve this problem. This is one of the reasons I am participating in the Elsevier boycott and encourage all scholars to join me (google The Cost of Knowledge).

My two bits,

Heather Morrison

On Dec 7, 2013, at 8:07 AM, "Bosman, J.M." <j.bosman at uu.nl<mailto:j.bosman at uu.nl>> wrote:

Peter,

This is not about where authors may self archive their papers, but about the version they archive. Academia (and Researchgate, and personal sites) have thousands of published versions archived by the authors. That is against most publishers' policies. Cambridge University Press is a good exception allowing archiving of the publishers' version after an embargo period..

Elsevier has always been issuing takedown notices, but not at this scale and mostly not against their own authors. In that sense this is new and a sign that Elsevier wants to fight the very idea that outcomes of science should circulate freely.

Strictly juridically speaking Elsevier is just asserting copyright of course. But I hope it will be another wake up call for authors with the effect that they start to massively share their last author versions through their institutional repositories and other routes. And of course they can publish in reasonably priced full OA  journals.

Jeroen Bosman
Utrecht University Library



Op 7 dec. 2013 om 08:20 heeft "Richard Poynder" <ricky at richardpoynder.co.uk<mailto:ricky at richardpoynder.co.uk>> het volgende geschreven:

List members can also refer to the following article in The Chronicle of Higher Education, which includes comments from the founder and CEO of Academia.edu<http://Academia.edu> Richard Price, and from Elsevier:

http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/posting-your-latest-article-you-might-have-to-take-it-down/48865

Elsevier has also posted a statement on the matter here:

http://www.elsevier.com/connect/a-comment-on-takedown-notices



From: goal-bounces at eprints.org<mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org> [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] On Behalf Of Peter Murray-Rust
Sent: 07 December 2013 05:04
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Cc: jisc-repositories; ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Elsevier Study Commissioned by UK BIS

List members may be aware that Elsevier sent out thousands of take-down notices for Green OA yesterday. See http://svpow.com/2013/12/06/elsevier-is-taking-down-papers-from-academia-edu/ and much twitter discussion.
These manuscripts are Green. They are self archived by authors after publication.
But this is forbidden by Elsevier - the manuscripts can only be posted in an Institutional Repository (and then, I assume, only if there is no mandate requiring deposition).
This is lunacy and it's to the discredit of the academics that they play this convoluted and sterile game created by the publishers. Publishers' reason for insisting on IRs over Academia.edu<http://Academia.edu> is that readers actually use Academia.
The purpose of the BOAI declaration was to make scholarship available to everyone. This farce makes scholarship available to almost no-one.

_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL at eprints.org<mailto:GOAL at eprints.org>
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL at eprints.org<mailto:GOAL at eprints.org>
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20131207/f6696304/attachment.html