Open Access News

News from the open access movement

Saturday, October 13, 2007

OA articles should allow harvesting and repurposing

Peter Murray-Rust, Outrage: Repurposing Open Access material is allowed without explicit permission, A Scientist and the Web, October 13, 2007.  Excerpt:

In One Day I’ll Have Lunch with Egon Willighagen Too…, Chemspiderman wrote

“So what can we do now to help making connections between papers and molecules? Peter Corbett, who works with Peter Murray Rust, is working on automated methods of getting computers to read chemistry papers and output semantic markup of them. “

AW> Over at ChemSpider we are working with Will Griffiths who developed ChemRefer . We have already extracted 10s of thousands of chemical names and will be linking them up to ChemSpider structures to enable Open Access papers to be structure/substructure searchable. However, we’ve hit a bit of a hurdle…more details on this will follow shortly but we have been asked to remove thousands of articles indexed according to what we believe is a standard search engine policy from the ChemRefer index. During our conversation today with the publisher the conversion of chemical names to chemical structures to provide a structure searchable index of the articles was deemed to be “re-purposing” of the Open Access articles and is NOT allowable....

PMR: This makes no sense at all. As I understand it Chemrefer indexes Open Access chemistry articles (I did a brief search and verified that there were no articles from ACS, RSC. Wiley, Elsevier and all those other publishers who help scientific communication by closing information)....

What what in the world is happening above? The articles are either Open Access or they are not. If they are not, then they had better not be labelled Open Access. If they are, then they cannot and should not and for goodness’ sake should not want to restrict any repurposing.

Who is the publisher. We have to know. I have a good idea, but it would be quite improper to say.

Because if the report above is true, it’s outrageous.