From: "Hinchliffe, Lisa W" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 21:49:42 +0000 At Ann's assurance that this could be valuable to our listserv conversation and not overly distracting, I'm sharing the responses that I sent to the questions in the consultation (http://www.stm-assoc.org/stm-consultations/scn-consultation-2015/). My approach in responding is based in the assumption that of course STM has a purpose in opening the consultation. I appreciate that it creates a forum in which to begin a dialogue about scholarly sharing. What I might want and what a publisher might want - well, they are likely different and what a scholar wants may be yet something else - but we all benefit by understanding different perspectives, even if we can't always reconcile them into a single set of principles. So, for what it is worth ... one submits via email and I don't know how long it takes for them to be posted online so I can't yet point you to the website. Instead, what I responded is below and also here if you prefer a link: https://www.evernote.com/shard/s22/sh/00108b75-233b-4c38-adfc-f86018e26227/aca91a3dbbce01280966d8a582fcbea7 I welcome comment on any of the feedback I sent as well as looking forward to what others are considering in their responses. 1. What impact do you think a unified approach to scholarly article sharing would have? - While I applaud the motivation to ensure a baseline of expectations that enables sharing and the positive aspects in that, I am concerned that such a unified approach as it is currently proposed will be interpreted as the maximum limits of what is allowed rather than a set of minimum expectations of what publishers should enable and expect. If this sets a maximum limit, it will ultimately be then a negative impact rather than the positive intended. Individual authors should be free to negotiate for more extensive sharing rights (and indeed some publishers already offer more than what is describe in the principles) and it would be a great disappointment if the idea of a unified approach is used as a counter to such requests or decrease what is already offered. 2. Do you have other ideas about how the sharing of scholarly research should function within the research community? - The research community is much more inclusive than the "academic groups" described. The FAQ comments on corporate researchers and the like. I would mention the development of citizen science and the increasing emphasis on exchange between academics and citizen science. Limiting sharing to academic groups posits a reality that does not map to the kinds of groups current and emerging on campuses. Likewise, academic groups does not account for the critically important public engagement function of the extension services of our land-grant universities, particularly with regard to applied science in agricultural practice. 3. It is our aim to continue to refine the thinking and approach to article sharing. What feedback or guidance can you offer for further consideration or to help next steps? - I hope that all who comment will be contacted directly during next steps. This might be a good place to mention that measuring amount and type of sharing should be done in ways that also allow individuals to protect their personal privacy and the competitive advantage of their work (e.g., such tracking should not reveal research agendas within a group that might impede their ability to claim first mover advantage in applying for grant funding, for example). 4. Would your organization be willing to actively participate and contribute to this process? - I am responding as an individual, not for an organization, but as an individual I can affirm that I am willing to participate and contribute. 5. Do you support the initial outline ‘Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks’? - I support its role in generating discussion but not the text as written, primarily due to concerns articulated in response to Q1. ************************************************************************************************************* Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe Professor/Coordinator for Strategic Planning/Coordinator for Information Literacy Services and Instruction University Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign [log in to unmask]