Open Access policies: An Overview. The OpenDOAR Policy Tool. Copyright management. - Shorten version

Open Access policies: An Overview. The OpenDOAR Policy Tool. Copyright management. Iryna Kuchma, eIFL Open Access program manager, eIFL.net Presented at Open Access: Maximising Research Impact, April 24 2009, New Bulgarian University Library, Sofia

Berlin Declaration in Support of Open Access
‘ Our mission of disseminating knowledge
is only half complete
if the information is not made widely
and readily available to society.’
Issued on 22 nd October 2003
http://www. zim .mpg.de/ openaccess - berlin / berlindeclaration .html

Berlin Declaration in Support of Open Access
Signatories should promote open access by
encouraging researchers/grant recipients
to publish in open access. - encouraging the holders of cultural heritage
to support open access
by providing their resources on the Internet. - developing means to evaluate
open access contributions and online-journals
in order to maintain the standards of quality assurance and good scientific practice. - advocating that open access publication
be recognized in promotion and tenure evaluation.

Open Access policies
Increasing number of Open Access policies from:
Research groups
Research centers
Universities
Funding bodies
Governments
National and international bodies

Funder policies - mandates
Australian Research Council
National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia
Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Research Foundation Flanders)
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
European Research Council (ERC)
Agence Nationale de la recherche (France)
Health Research Board (HRB) of Ireland
Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering & Technology
Swiss National Science Foundation
Arthritis Research Foundation, UK
Arts and Humanities Research Council, UK
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), UK
British Heart Foundation
Cancer Research UK
Chief Scientist Office (Scottish Executive Health Department)
Department of Health (UK)
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), UK
JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee), UK
Medical Research Council (MRC), UK
National Environmental Research Council (NERC), UK
Science & Technology Facilities Council, UK
Wellcome Trust, UK
National Institutes of Health (NIH), USA
Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)

The Wellcome Trust, UK
From October 1 2006,
it became a condition of funding
that copy of any original research paper published in a peer-reviewed journal
must be deposited into PubMed Central. http://www. wellcome .ac. uk /doc_WTX022827.html

National Institutes of Health
The U.S. National Institutes of Health , the single largest funder of research in the U.S with an annual budget of $28.9 billion USD, implemented a policy requiring that its grant recipients make articles resulting from any NIH funding publicly available within 12 months of publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
This policy, passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by the President, went into effect in April of 2008.
(Alliance for Taxpayer Access, Worldwide momentum for policies supporting public access to publicly funded research)

The European Research Council
In January of 2008 The European Research Council (ERC) implemented a mandatory public access policy for its funded researchers.
The policy states:
“ Requires that all peer-reviewed publications from ERC-funded research projects be deposited on publication into an appropriate research repository where available, such as PubMed Central, ArXiv or an institutional repository, and subsequently made Open Access within 6 months of publication.”
(Alliance for Taxpayer Access, Worldwide momentum for policies supporting public access to publicly funded research)

Proposed Funder mandates
European Commission
European Research Advisory Board (EURAB)
European University Association (EUA)
Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA), USA

European University Association
Universities should develop
institutional policies and strategies
that foster the availability
of their quality-controlled research results
for the broadest possible range of users,
maximising their visibility, accessibility
and scientific impact.
The basic approach …should be
the creation of an institutional repository
or participation in a shared repository..
http://www. eua .be/ fileadmin /user_upload/files/Policy_Positions/Recommendations_Open_Access_adopted_by_the_EUA_Council_on_26th_of_March_2008_final. pdf

European University Association
University institutional policies
should require that their researchers
deposit (self-archive) their scientific publications
in their institutional repository (IPR)
upon acceptance for publication.
Permissible embargoes should apply
only to the date of open access provision
and not the date of deposit.
...It should be the responsibility of the university
to inform their faculty researchers about IPR
and copyright management…
http://www. eua .be/ fileadmin /user_upload/files/Policy_Positions/Recommendations_Open_Access_adopted_by_the_EUA_Council_on_26th_of_March_2008_final. pdf

Harvard
Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences
voted to adopt a policy under which
faculty are required to deposit
a copy of their scholarly journal articles
in an institutional repository and
(2) automatically to grant to the University
a University License to make those articles openly accessible on the Internet.

Harvard
The Faculty of Arts and Sciences of Harvard University is committed to disseminating
the fruits of its research and scholarship
as widely as possible.
In keeping with that commitment,
the Faculty adopts the following policy:
Each Faculty member grants to the President and Fellows of Harvard College permission
to make available his or her scholarly articles
and to exercise the copyright in those articles.

Harvard
In legal terms, the permission granted by each Faculty member is a nonexclusive, irrevocable, paid-up, worldwide license to exercise any and all rights under copyright relating to each of his or her scholarly articles, in any medium, and to authorize others to do the same,
provided that the articles are not sold for a profit.

Ukraine
Since January 2007 Ukraine has a law - proposed mandate for open access to publicly funded research.
The Law of Ukraine On the principles of developing information society in Ukraine for 2007-20015 at www. rada . gov . ua

Ukraine
And the most recent open access policy
adopted by Ternopil State Ivan Pul'uj Technical University (TSTU)
mandates that all published journal articles
and conference papers
must be deposited in Electronic Archive of TSTU (ELARTU http:// dspace . tstu . edu . ua )
if there are no legal objections by publishers.
ELARTU also encourages and fully supports
self-archiving of other research outputs
produced by scientists and students of the university as well as other members of the scientific community.

Open Access – A Policy Issue
Open Access policies are:
Welcomed by authors
Complied with by authors
Compatible with copyright and respect authors’ moral rights
Compatible with patent registration
Respectful of academic and intellectual freedoms
Aligned with the aims of most funding bodies and institutions
Effective!

Appealing to All the Major Stakeholders
To the funders of researcher – both as a public service and as an increased return on their investment in research
To the authors – as it gives wider dissemination and impact
To readers – as it gives them access to all primary literature, making the most important ‘research tool’ more powerful

Appealing to All the Major Stakeholders
To editors and reviewers – as they feel their work is more valued
To the libraries – as it allows them to meet the information needs of their users
To the institutions – as it increases their presence and prestige
To small and society publishers – as it gives them a survival strategy and fits with their central remit

Repository policies The OpenDOAR Policy Tool

OA policy options
Open access policy options for funding agencies and universities
(Based on The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #130 and The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #127,
by Peter Suber: http://www. earlham . edu /~peters/ fos /newsletter/02-02-09. htm
and http://www. earlham . edu /~peters/ fos /newsletter/11-02-08. htm )

Request or require?
Recommendation :
If you're serious about achieving open access
for the research you fund,
you must require it.

Green or gold?
Recommendation :
If you decide to request and encourage open access, rather than a mandate it,
then you can encourage submission to an open access journal and encourage deposit in an open access repository as well, especially when researchers publish in a toll access journal.
But if you decide to mandate open access,
then you should require deposit in an open access repository, and not require submission to an open access journal, even if you also encourage submission to an open access journal.

Which repository?
Recommendation :
Because there are advantages to each type of repository, and because each provides bona fide open access, the stakes are low in the choice between them. That is, you can't go seriously wrong by preferring one to the other. One path, then, is simply to make a choice. Another is to support both types in ranked order, for example, requiring deposit in an institutional repository, when the grantee's institution has one, and otherwise requiring deposit in the funder's repository or in a designated disciplinary or multi-disciplinary repository.
Another path is to shift the choice to authors.

Deposit what?
Recommendation:
Require the deposit of the final version of the author's peer-reviewed manuscript, not the published version.
Require the deposit of data generated by the funded research project. In medicine and the social sciences, where privacy is an issue, open access data should be anonymised.
A peer-reviewed manuscript in an open access repository should include a citation and link to the published edition.

Deposit what?
Recommendation:
Allow the deposit of unrefereed preprints,
previous journal articles,
conference presentations (slides, text, audio, video), book manuscripts, book metadata (especially when the author cannot or will not deposit the full-text), and the contents of journals edited or published on campus.
The university itself could consider other categories as well, such as open courseware, administrative records, and digitization projects from the library, theses and dissertations

Scope of policy?
Recommendation :
For simplicity and enforceability,
follow the example of most funding agencies: apply your open access policy
to research you fund
"in whole or in part"

What embargo?
Recommendation :
Cap the permissible embargo at six months. Any embargo is a compromise with the public interest;
even when they are justified compromises,
the shorter they are, the better.

What exceptions?
Recommendation :
Exempt private notes and records not intended for publication.
Exempt classified research.
Either exempt patentable discoveries or allow an embargo long enough for the researcher to apply for a patent. (This could be a special embargo not allowed to other research.)
And unless you fund research, which often results in royalty-producing books, exempt royalty-producing books.

Managing rights for OA
As content producers
(responsible for licensing- out), universities need to deal
with ownership of rights
in material produced by academics, researchers etc
- rights to be granted to others publishers;
- users and re-users

Repository Deposit Licence
ensures that depositors own copyright in the material they are depositing or have permission from the copyright owner to deposit;
and grants to the repository the necessary rights to make the material available to end-users
(from A Guide to Developing Open Access Through Your Digital Repository by Kylie Pappalardo and Dr Anne Fitzgerald, Open Access to Knowledge Law Project)

Author Distribution Agreement
Do you want to provide a facility to enable authors to enter into an Author Distribution Agreement with end-users, for example by attaching a Creative Commons licence to their work?
Required end-users to agree (through a click-wrap agreement) to the terms of the Author Distribution Agreement or the Repository Distribution (End-User) Agreement?
(from A Guide to Developing Open Access Through Your Digital Repository by Kylie Pappalardo and Dr Anne Fitzgerald, Open Access to Knowledge Law Project)

Plagiarism
If articles are easily available, then plagiarism will be made easier?
“ In fact, plagiarism is diminished as a problem. It is far easier to detect if the original, date-stamped material is freely accessible to all, rather than being hidden in an obscure journal.”
( http :// www .driver- support . eu / faq / oafaq . html )

Plagiarism
How can I protect myself from plagiarism, or from someone altering my paper and using it in a way I disapprove of?
“ It is easier to detect simple plagiarism with electronic than with printed text by using search engines or other services to find identical texts. For more subtle forms of misuse, the difficulties of detection are no greater than with traditional journal articles. Indeed, metadata tagging, including new ways of tracking the provenance of electronic data and text, promise to make it easier.”
(JISC Opening up Access to Research Results: Questions and Answers, www. jisc .ac. uk /publications )

Plagiarism
In the early days, some authors worried that OA would increase the incentive to plagiarize their work. But this worry made no sense and has not been borne out. On the contrary. OA might make plagiarism easier to commit, for people trolling for text to cut and paste. But for the same reason, OA makes plagiarism more hazardous to commit. Insofar as OA makes plagiarism easier, it's only for plagiarism from OA sources. But plagiarism from OA sources is the easiest kind to detect. Not all plagiarists are smart, of course, but the smart ones are steering clear of OA sources.
http://www. earlham . edu /~peters/ fos /newsletter/10-02-06. htm #quality

Plagiarism
For the same reason, they'll avoid OA dissemination for any of their own works containing plagiarized passages.
Because OA will only reduce plagiarism by smart plagiarists, the effect may be small. And today the effect is small in any case because so little of the literature is OA. But just as we can expect good things from a pest-resistant strain of wheat, even when we've just introduced it in one field, we can expect good things from this plagiarism-resistant strain of research literature.
http://www. earlham . edu /~peters/ fos /newsletter/10-02-06. htm #quality

Plagiarism
Discovering and deterring duplicate publications
A study in the January 24 issue of Nature turned up 200,000+ duplicate articles in journals indexed by Medline.
As the OA percentage of the literature continues to grow, journals wishing to avoid publishing a duplicate or plagiarized article will find it easier to discover potential problems in advance of publication. Likewise, journals that don't care, or with the opposite desire, will find it harder to publish duplicates undetected.
http://www. earlham . edu /~peters/ fos /2008/01/discovering-and-deterring-duplicate.html

Thank you ! Questions ? Iryna Kuchma iryna.kuchma[at]eifl.net; www. eifl .net The presentation is licensed with Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License

Open Access policies: An Overview. The OpenDOAR Policy Tool. Copyright management. - Shorten version

by Iryna Kuchma

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 16

Statistics

Open Access policies: An Overview. The OpenDOAR Policy Tool. Copyright management. - Shorten version Presentation Transcript