Current Liblicense Archive - Re: Charles Oppenheim on who owns the rights to scholarly articles

List archives since November 2011, after the list migrated to the Center for Research Libraries.


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LIBLICENSE-L Home

LIBLICENSE-L Home

LIBLICENSE-L  February 2014

LIBLICENSE-L February 2014

Subject:

Re: Charles Oppenheim on who owns the rights to scholarly articles

From:

LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 5 Feb 2014 19:52:07 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (100 lines)

From: Stevan Harnad <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 08:21:56 -0500

Digital Formality and Digital Reality

1. Sixty percent of journals (including Elsevier) state formally in
their copyright agreements that their authors retain the right to make
their final, peer-reviewed, revised and accepted version (Green) Open
Access (OA) immediately, without embargo, by self-archiving them in
their institutional repositories.

2. The Elsevier take-down notices did not pertain to the author's
final version but to the publisher's version of record (and in the
case of 3rd party sites like academia.edu they concerned not only the
version but the location).

3. The IDOA (immediate-deposit, optional-access) mandate is formally
immune to take-down notices, because it separates deposit from OA.

4. For articles published in the 60% of journals in which authors
formally retain their right to provide immediate, unembargoed Green
OA, they can be self-archived immediately in the institutional
repository and also made OA immediately.

5. For articles published in the 40% of journals that formally embargo
OA, if authors wish to comply with the publisher's embargo, the final,
peer-reviewed, revised and accepted version can still be deposited
immediately in the institutional repository, with access set as Closed
Access (CA) during any embargo: only the title and abstract are
accessible to all users; the full text is accessible only to the
author.

6. For CA deposits, institutional repositories have an
email-eprint-request Button with which individual users can launch an
automated email request to the author for an individual copy for
research purposes, with one click; the author can then decide, on an
individual case by case basis, with one click, whether or not the
repository software should email a copy to that requestor.

7. It is the IDOA + Button Strategy that is the update of the
"Harnad-Oppenheim Prepint + Corrigenda" Strategy.

8. But of course even the IDOA + Button Strategy is unnecessary, as is
definitively demonstrated by what I would like to dub the "Computer
Science + Physics Strategy":

9. Computer scientists since the 1980's and Physicists since the
1990's have been making both their preprints and their final drafts
freely accessibly online immediately, without embargo (the former in
institutional FTP archives and then institutional websites, and the
latter in Arxiv, a 3rd-party website) without any take-down notices
(and, after over a quarter century, even the mention of the prospect
of author take-down notices for these papers is rightly considered
ludicrous).

10. I accordingly recommend the following: Let realistic authors
authors practice the Computer Science + Physics Strategy and let
formalistic authors practice the IDOA + Button Strategy -- but let them
all deposit their their final, peer-reviewed, revised and accepted
versions immediately.

Sale, A., Couture, M., Rodrigues, E., Carr, L. and Harnad, S. (2012)
Open Access Mandates and the "Fair Dealing" Button. In: Dynamic Fair
Dealing: Creating Canadian Culture Online (Rosemary J. Coombe & Darren
Wershler, Eds.)




On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 6:44 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Richard Poynder <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:09:47 +0000
>
> The recent decision by Elsevier to start sending take down notices to
> sites like Academia.edu, and to individual universities, demanding
> that they remove self-archived papers from their web sites has sparked
> a debate about the copyright status of different versions of a
> scholarly paper.
>
> Last week, the Scholarly Communications Officer at Duke University in
> the US, Kevin Smith, published a blog post challenging a widely held
> assumption amongst OA advocates that when scholars transfer copyright
> in their papers they transfer only the final version of the article.
> This is not true, Smith argued.
>
> If correct, this would seem to have important implications for Green
> OA, not least because it would mean that publishers have greater
> control over self-archiving than OA advocates assume.
>
> However Charles Oppenheim, a UK-based copyright specialist, believes
> that OA advocates are correct in thinking that when an author signs a
> copyright assignment only the rights in the final version of the paper
> are transferred, and so authors retain the rights to all earlier
> versions of their work, certainly under UK and EU law. As such, they
> are free to post earlier versions of their papers on the Web.
>
> Charles Oppenheim explains his thinking here:
>
> http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/guest-post-charles-oppenheim-on-who.html

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options



Archives

September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011

RSS1