From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 19:45:55 -0400


Alicia Wise also linked to this chart in her posting of 4 June, and
I happen to agree that the clarifications are more crisp and thus are
useful -- and in some cases actually increase share-ability.

In the extensive liblicense-l discussion on this whole matter, Rick
is the one commentator who references the chart.  Others haven't
commented - perhaps they haven't yet looked at it?

The largest amount of heat has been generated over the length
of embargoes, some (?) being as long as 48 months, presumably.
Now, I've assumed that Elsevier (like Springer, Wiley, and others)
distributes (or publishes, if you will) a number of journals that
it doesn't own or control.  These are likely produced by societies
and research organizations and contracted with Elsevier.

What I next assumed is that the owners of those journals are
responsible for their policies about revenue, access, editorial, etc.
And so, it would be up to them to decide about the length of the
embargo period, not necessarily Elsevier.  Since Alicia noted
that the length of embargo is an ongoing topic of conversation
at Elsevier, I also assumed that as much as possible Elsevier
would like to rationalize or normalize the embargo period, but
is not always able to do that.  So I've not laid the responsibility
for longer embargo periods squarely at Elsevier's door.

Is this correct (Alicia, please!) or am I wrong here (possibly
many readers will tell me that I am.

Regards, Ann Okerson


On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 3:31 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 11:11:21 +0000
>
> Speaking as someone who was indeed somewhat confused ― not by the new
> policy itself, but rather from trying to figure out what had and had not
> changed with the new policy ― I find the matrix of differences to which
> Alicia provided a link:
>
> (http://www.slideshare.net/aliciawise/whats-changed-in-sharing-policy)
>
> tremendously helpful.
>
> What I see on that matrix leads me to ask this group two very simple
> questions of my own:
>
> 1. As far as anyone on this list can tell, does it fully and accurately
> represent what has changed with the new policy?
>
> 2. If so, it appears to me that Elsevier’s new sharing policy represents a
> net increase in liberality when it comes to sharing and posting ― am I
> mistaken about that?
>
> ---
> Rick Anderson
> Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections
> Marriott Library, University of Utah
> [log in to unmask]