LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 24 Jun 2015 19:58:18 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 00:15:19 +0000

>2. If so, it appears to me that Elsevier’s new sharing policy actually
>represents a net increase in liberality when it comes to sharing and
>posting ― am I mistaken about that?
>
>Rick, previously authors who were not subject to deposit mandates
>could deposit their papers without embargo. Now they can’t.  I think
>that is a significant decrease in liberality and outweighs the
>increases (which in some areas was just Elsevier catching-up with
>existing practice)

Thanks, David ― but one clarifying question: isn’t it true that authors
can still deposit the preprint version of the article without any embargo?
If that’s true, then this isn’t really a matter of the research itself
being subject to a new embargo, but only the final manuscript. Do I have
that right? And if so, then in your view, is that insufficient?

---
Rick Anderson
Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections
Marriott Library, University of Utah
Desk: (801) 587-9989
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2