Steve Inchcoombe, managing director of Nature Publishing Group writes, of Nature:
"We also support and encourage self-archiving of the author?s final version of accepted articles."
But if you look in the Romeo directory of publisher self-archiving policies, you will find that whereas Nature is indeed among the 92% of journals that have endorsed the immediate self-archiving of the author's unrefereed first draft (the preprint), Nature is not among the 63% of journals that have endorsed the immediate self-archiving of the author's peer-reviewed final draft (the postprint) -- the one that is the real target of OA, and indispensable for research usage and progress.
Nature used to be "green" on the immediate self-archiving of both preprints and postprints, but, taking half of NIH's maximal allowable access embargo as its own minimum in 2005, Nature became one of the few journals that back-slid in 2005 to impose a 6-month embargo on open access to the peer-reviewed final draft.
PS: Also see my own comments on the Inchcoombe interview.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 6/17/2008 06:27:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
