From: Peter Murray-Rust <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 11:14:45 +0100

Thanks Fred,

At one level it is true that we get the contracts we deserve, but only
if the issues are known. And the #scholarlypoor does not get the
contracts it deserves.

>Peter's complaint that libraries do not challenge use or re-use clauses in contracts is not absolutely true,

I give two examples - DRM ("Digital Rights Management") and TDM ("text
and data mining"). Libraries (including national libraries) have
widely agreed to practices that restrict access to and re-use of
information. But these issues were unknown to me and the general
public before the contracts were signed and the practices implemented.
My libraries has signed rights with major publishers that drastically
restrict my rights to re-use the information (via TDM) that my library
has paid for. No one consulted me and I doubt it anyone consulted a
university board or committee. (I might use FOI to find out - anyone
can do it).

Yet this was done in secret because the publishers insist on secrecy
and the libraries agree. Whereas prices may be secrecy sensitive there
is no justification for not consulting on rights before signing.
Libraries should advertise what they are being asked to sign - only in
that way do I have any moral responsibility as an academic.

> And yet a very senior publisher once told me that librarians have much more power than they realise.

Yes, but many librarians see their business with publishers as a
fundamental part of their existence. One librarian came to me
enthusiastically "isn't it wonderful - we can pay for TR's data
citation index". [my view is we should be building our own data
citation index, not handing control to commercial interests and I am
trying to do part of it]. Another anecdote - when asked by an academic
to publish his/her dataset "we cannot archive academic datasets - our
role is to buy datasets from publishers".

> However, librarians cannot bear all of the blame for giving in too easily. My hard stance received no backing from senior academics, and no librarian can refuse to sign an unsatisfactory contract unless they know that they have solid support from within their university. Of course Elsevier and other publishers know this and that is why they want to conclude deals with senior university management, who will probably agree to unsatisfactory clauses even more readily than the librarians.

I have no idea which part of my university signed away my rights. I
know it was the librarians in UBC who did a deal with Elsevier to
agree to give up Heather Piwowar's rights to TDM  and negotiate on a
case-by-case basis.

> I am sorry to be cynical, but the academic community gets the contracts it deserves. We have to learn to say "no" and really mean it.

The #scholarlypoor does not get the contracts it deserves. The issues
have to be out in the open.

--
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK