• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
The OpenDOAR Policy Tool.  Copyright management.
 

The OpenDOAR Policy Tool. Copyright management.

on

  • 1,796 views

Presented at “Open Access: Maximising Research Impact” workshop, May 26 2009,

Presented at “Open Access: Maximising Research Impact” workshop, May 26 2009,
Birzeit University Library, Palestine

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,796
Views on SlideShare
1,796
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    The OpenDOAR Policy Tool.  Copyright management. The OpenDOAR Policy Tool. Copyright management. Presentation Transcript

    • The OpenDOAR Policy Tool. Copyright management. Iryna Kuchma, eIFL Open Access program manager, eIFL.net Presented at “ Open Access: Maximising Research Impact ” wor kshop, May 26 2009, Birzeit University Library, Palestine
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    • Thanks to the SHERPA Team
      • Especially
      • Peter Millington, Technical Development Officer
      • for the slides
    • 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.
    • Green or gold?
      • Recommendation :
      • 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 .
    • 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
    •  
    • Copyright Management
      • Provide Intellectual Property Rights support by
      • Admitting to the challenges and fears
      • surrounding IPR; empathise with the author
      • b. Emphasising what can be done rather than what not
      • c. Analysing the publisher challenges
      • within your specific subject communities
      • where different challenges will be apparent
        • From Proudman, V. (2007) The population of repositories. In Eds. K. Weenink, L.Waaijers and K. van Godtsenhoven, A DRIVER's Guide to European Repositories (pp.49 - 101)
    •  
    •  
    • Permissions
    • Copyright Management 2
      • d. Ensuring that your IR team liaising with the author
      • is informed and up-to-date
      • on self-archiving and related publisher policies
      • e. Utilising and monitoring tools such as Sherpa/RoMEO to support you in your information.
      • f. Liaising with publishers on a case by case basis
      • if time and resources allow
        • From Proudman, V. (2007) The population of repositories. In Eds. K. Weenink, L.Waaijers and K. van Godtsenhoven, A DRIVER's Guide to European Repositories (pp.49 - 101)
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    • Copyright management 3
      • g. Encouraging your authors to liaise with publishers
      • on the self-archival of their own work,
      • striving for the immediate deposit of publications in repositories in the future
      • h. Discussing with your authors how to improve the dissemination of their work in the future
      • and experimenting with them on making more material open access
      • i. Securing agreements between Library and author where possible
        • From Proudman, V. (2007) The population of repositories. In Eds. K. Weenink, L.Waaijers and K. van Godtsenhoven, A DRIVER's Guide to European Repositories (pp.49 - 101)
    • Repository Deposit License
      • 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: http :// eprints . qut . edu . au / archive /00009671/01/9671. pdf )
    • 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 license to their work?
      • Require 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: http :// eprints . qut . edu . au / archive /00009671/01/9671. pdf )
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    • Creative Commons
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    • 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 2
      • 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.
        • (JISC Opening up Access to Research Results: Questions and Answers, www. jisc .ac. uk /publications )
    • Plagiarism 3
      • 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 4
      • 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.
      • http://www. earlham . edu /~peters/ fos /newsletter/10-02-06. htm #quality
    • Plagiarism 5
      • 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 6
      • For the same reason,
      • they'll avoid OA dissemination
      • for any of their own works
      • containing plagiarized passages.
      • http://www. earlham . edu /~peters/ fos /newsletter/10-02-06. htm #quality
    • Plagiarism 7
      • 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.
      • http://www. earlham . edu /~peters/ fos /2008/01/discovering-and-deterring-duplicate.html
    • Plagiarism 8
      • 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
    •  
    •  
    •  
    • Action Steps Checklist
      • Here is a summary of key steps
      • to implementing a University License policy
      • at your institution:
      • Identify key internal supporters and champions.
      • 2. Research your institution’s rules and procedures
      • to understand the right process
      • for initiating the policy change.
    • Action Steps Checklist 2
      • 3. Work with provosts, faculty governance, and the general counsel’s office to determine critical policy and legal requirements that must be met by the policy.
      • 4. Work with an existing faculty committee
      • or create an ad-hoc committee
      • to study your institution’s scholarly communications policy.
    • Action Steps Checklist 3
      • 5. Communicate the plan to faculty and key stakeholders and conduct surveys or obtain other feedback to determine faculty support.
      • 6. Identify and take advantage of events for education and awareness building, such as seminars, discussion panels, presentations, and colloquia.
      • Consider holding a workshop to discuss open access.
    • Action Steps Checklist 4
      • 7. Develop a set of policy recommendations, including the scope of the University License, the deposit requirement, and opt-out provisions.
      • 8. Identify critical resources and support
      • that will be needed to implement the policy,
      • including responsibility for maintaining an institutional archive.
      • Prepare to provide resources to assist faculty
      • in complying with the policy
      • and working with publishers.
    • Action Steps Checklist 5
      • 9. Plan for success: work with the institution library
      • to make sure there is a repository to maintain
      • and allow download of deposited articles
      • and that it has sufficient capacity –
      • or that there is a plan to create one.
      • 10. Find the faculty who already are posting their work on the Internet by searching the Web and asking around. By their actions, they are signalling an understanding of why open access is important.
      • Do the librarians have stories of access problems faced by faculty or other researchers?
    • 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 2
      • 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 3
      • 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/her scholarly articles, in any medium,
      • and to authorize others to do the same,
      • provided that the articles are not sold for a profit.
    •  
    • Thank you ! Questions ? Iryna Kuchma iryna.kuchma[at]eifl.net; www. eifl .net The presentation is licensed with Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License