From: Annaig Mahe <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 10:10:05 +0200 From what I have understood, this matrix does not fully tell the story and the new policy is both simplier (or tries to be) and more restricted than the old one : 1- What is missing on the matrix, is the fact that the accepted manuscript can be immediately deposited to update a preprint on ArXiv and RePec (only). A second kind of information is also missing: that is, which commercial social sharing platforms are having (or will have) an agreement with Elsevier. On its website, Elsevier gives this list : http://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/open-access/agreements - but I must admit this is not what I had understood with "commercial social sharing platform". I was more thinking about such platforms as Academia.edu or ResearchGate... This list seems more to be the list of agreements between Elsevier and institutions using "accepted manuscripts for internal purposes and private sharing". 2 - The new policy is somewhat simplier and more restricted because the difference between voluntary and mandated deposit on institutional repositories does not exist anymore. Under the old policy, authors could voluntarily deposit their accepted manuscript without embargo, and where a mandate existed, an agreement was necessary between Elsevier and the mandating institution (+ an embargo) before a deposit could be made. Now, the accepted manuscript can be immediately "ingested" by the institutional repositories but, if I have understood clearly, without being made immediately publicly available (= visible, open access), only after a period of embargo. And where institutions wish to use accepted mansucripts for "internal purposes and private sharing", an agreement with Elsevier is needed (see the list above). So this seems to me to amount to a more restricted policy, as the immediate availability of voluntary deposit is not possible anymore (only on personal website, ArXiv and RePec): immediate ingesting does not mean immediate open access (or have I mistaken the meaning of "ingesting" ?). Even when self-archiving is now allowed on subject repositories (or commercial social sharing platforms with an agreement), this is with an embargo. Annaïg Mahé Lecturer in information science Urfist de Paris / Ecole nationale des chartes http://urfist.enc.sorbonne.fr/ Le 23/06/2015 00:53, LIBLICENSE a écrit : > > From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 22:40:49 +0000 > > I would still be very interested in answers to my two questions below, > particularly from those who have been most critical of Elsevier’s new > policy. > > 1. As far as anyone on this list can tell, does the matrix at > http://www.slideshare.net/aliciawise/whats-changed-in-sharing-policy fully > and accurately represent what has changed with the new policy? > > 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 Anderson > Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections > Marriott Library, University of Utah > [log in to unmask]