From: [log in to unmask]
Date: Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:11 AM
**Cross-Posted**
El 11/05/2012 11:19, Wise, Alicia (Elsevier) asked:
[W]hat positive things are established scholarly publishers doing to
facilitate the various visions for open access and future scholarly
communications that should be encouraged, celebrated, recognized?
Dr Alicia Wise
Director of Universal Access
Elsevier I The Boulevard I Langford Lane I Kidlington I Oxford I OX5 1GB
**************
On 2012-05-11, at 6:13 AM, Reme Melero wrote:
I would recommend the following change in one clause of the What
rights do I retain as a journal author*? stated in Elsevier's portal,
which says
"the right to post a revised personal version of the text of the final
journal article (to reflect changes made in the peer review process)
on your personal or institutional website or server for scholarly
purposes*, incorporating the complete citation and with a link to the
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of the article (but not in
subject-oriented or centralized repositories or institutional
repositories with mandates for systematic postings unless there is a
specific agreement with the publisher. <externalLink_3.gif>Click here
for further information);"
By this one:
"the right to post a revised personal version of the text of the final
journal article (to reflect changes made in the peer review process)
on your personal, institutional website, subject-oriented or
centralized repositories or institutional repositories or server for
scholarly purposes, incorporating the complete citation and with a
link to the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of the article "
I think this could be something to be encouraged, celebrated and recognized!
*****
Stevan Harnad wrote:
That would be fine. Or even this simpler one would be fine:
"the right to post a revised personal version of the text of the final
journal article (to reflect changes made in the peer review process)
on your personal, institutional website or institutional repositories
or server for scholarly purposes, incorporating the complete citation
and with a link to the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of the article
"
The metadata and link can be harvested from the institutional
repositories by institution-external repositories or search services,
and the shameful, cynical, self-serving and incoherent clause about
"mandates for systematic postings" ("you may post if you wish but
not if you must"), which attempts to take it all back, is dropped.
That clause -- added when Elsevier realized that Green Gratis OA
mandates were catching on -- is a paradigmatic example of the
publisher FUD and double-talk that Andrew Adams and others were
referring to on GOAL.
Dropping it would be a great cause for encouragement, celebration and
recognition, and would put Elsevier irreversibly on the side of the
angels.
Stevan Harnad
|
