News from the open access movementJump to navigation
The January/February 2009 issue of Educause Review is now available. See especially:
John Mark Ockerbloom, Public Domain Day 2009: Freeing the libraries, Everybody’s Libraries, January 1, 2009.
Update. See also the new version of the classification system.
Paul A. David and Jared Rubin, Restricting Access to Books on the Internet: Some Unanticipated Effects of U.S. Copyright Legislation, Review of Economic Research on Copyright Issues, June 2008. Abstract:
One manifestation of the trend towards the strengthening of copyright protection that has been noticeable during the past two decades is the secular extension of the potential duration during which access to copyrightable materials remains legally restricted. Those restrictions carry clear implications for the current and prospective costs to readers seeking “on-line” availability of the affected content in digital form, via the Internet. This paper undertakes to quantify one aspect of these developments by providing readily understandable measures of the restrictive consequences of the successive modifications that were made in U.S. copyright laws during the second half of the twentieth century. Specifically, we present estimates of the past, present and future number of copyrighted books belonging to different publication-date “cohorts” whose entry into the public domain (and consequent accessibility in scanned on-line form) will thereby have been postponed. In some instances these deferrals of access due to legislative extensions of the duration of copyright protection are found to reach surprisingly far into the future, and to arise from the effects of interactions among the successive changes in the law that generally have gone unnoticed.
Liz Allen, Save the date - Open Access Week 19-23 October 2009, Public Library of Science blog, January 14, 2009.
Thanks to Michael Mabe for releasing the document, and thanks to Stevan Harnad for seeking and obtaining permission to post excerpts. See Stevan's response to the document, using paraphrases instead of quotations, and his update, using quotations.
Here's my selection of the key excerpts from the document:
Update (1/26/09). Dorothea Salo has posted an open letter to STM, protesting the way it cited her work in the briefing document and left the impression that she supports its conclusions. Excerpt:
Update (1/28/09). STM has agreed to remove its reference to Dorothea Salo's work from its briefing document.
Indian Government maintains anti-access position regarding publicly-funded research, Universities Allied for Essential Medicines, December 21, 2008. (Thanks to Subbiah Arunachalam.) Excerpt:
PS: See my comment from last week on a similar law in South Africa.
John Mark Ockerbloom, Repository services, Part 1: Galleries vs. self-storage units, Everybody’s Libraries, January 13, 2009.
John Mark Ockerbloom, Repository services, Part 2: Supporting deposit and access, Everybody’s Libraries, January 15, 2009.
... In this post, I’ll describe some of the useful basic deposit and access services for institutional scholarly repositories (IRs). ...
Gerry Bayne, interview with John Wilbanks, podcast, January 15, 2009. Description:
Science Commons, a project of Creative Commons, has three interlocking initiatives designed to accelerate the research cycle. These include making scientific research “re-useful”, enabling “one-click” access to research materials, and integrating fragmented information sources. Together, these intiatives form the building blocks of a new collaborative infrastructure to make scientific discovery easier by design. Wilbanks discusses the copyright and technical challenges of contemplating a true knowledge browser.
Folger Shakespeare Library Expands Access to Digital Collection, press release, January 15, 2009.
Several steps preceded the conversion to OA:
Thomas R. Bruce, Sustainability, b-screeds, January 14, 2009.
The report from Creative Commons' December 13-14, 2008 board meeting is now online. See especially:
Jeffrey Tucker, Copyright, profit, and liturgical music, New Liturgical Movement, January 15, 2009. (Thanks to Gino D'Oca.) Tucker reprints a letter to the editor of the New Oxford Review, including this passage:
Then he adds his own comments. Excerpt:
PS: See our past posts on OA to Catholic liturgical texts and music.
M. Antonelli and G. Mercurio, Reporting, access, and transparency: better infrastructure of clinical trials, Critical Care Medicine, January 2009 (1 Supplement). I can't find this in the journal TOC, so I'm linking to the record at PubMed.
Frances Pinter, The Transformation of Academic Publishing in the Digital Era, a 55 minute video of a presentation at the Oxford Internet Institute. Undated but apparently recent. From the description:
Prue Adler and Charles Lowry of the ARL have an infrastructure suggestion for the Obama stimulus package: Establish a Universal, Open Library or Digital Data Commons. Excerpt:
Update (1/19/09). Also see Laurie N. Taylor's comments.
Also see this related story, in English: Christine von Oertzen, New Ways of Using Digital Images, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, undated. Excerpt:
The January/February 2009 issue of D-Lib is now available. See especially:
Michel Bauwens, The Most Important P2P Trends of 2008 and 2009, P2P Foundation, January 16, 2009.
Kerrie L. Burn and Katie Wilson, Build it and they will come?: assessing the impact of 'academic-friendly' practices on institutional repository growth at Southern Cross University, a paper to be presented at Information Online 2009 Conference, Sydney, 20-22 January 2009.
From the body of the paper:
Acceso libre a la información, II: ciencia pública e información administrativa pública, Kultura Abierta, undated but recent. Read the original Spanish or Google's English. (Thanks to José Gregorio del Sol Cobos.) The site is a production of the Basque Socialist Party.
... What happens with the results of [publicly-funded] research? Should not it be made more accessible and disseminated among the people who pay? ...
Library of Congress Leads Nationwide Digitization Effort, press release, January 14, 2009. (Thanks to Charles Bailey.)
Mary Anne Kennan and Fletcher T. H. Cole, Institutional repositories as portents of change: Disruption or reassembly? Conjectures and reconfigurations, presented at ASIS&T Annual Meeting, (Columbus, Ohio, October 24-29, 2008); self-archived January 14, 2009. Abstract:
This paper reviews how Open Access policies (OA) and Institutional Repositories (IR) might be portrayed as agents of change within the realm of scholarly publishing. Using commentary on academic publishing as background, commentary that sees OA and IR as optimal and inevitable, and beneficially disruptive of the existing system, two theoretical approaches are presented as ways of providing a more detailed and explicit analysis of OA/IR dynamics. Both theories to varying degrees derive their inspiration from an exploration of the nature of change. The first “disruptive technology/disruptive innovation” approach (Christensen) specifies change in market theory terms, a re-structuring "driven" by innovation within, and possibly disruptive of, existing market arrangements. The second approach views change as a process of "reassembling" and reconfiguring of relationships between elements of a network (Actor-Network Theory). The application of both approaches to OA/IR is explored, including reference to a case study on a university institutional repository implementation. While "disruption" and similar terms might be in common and casual use, the basic idea gains greater clarity in these theories, and in doing so promotes greater awareness of the assumptions being made, and the aspirations being pursued.
Arlene Mathison, Libraries and Publishing: Using Open Journal Systems, presented at the Transportation Librarians Roundtable (November 13, 2008). Slides with audio. (Thanks to the Public Knowledge Project.)
In November 2008, Maxi Kindling und Sandra Lechelt of Libreas conducted a 28:32 minute podcast interview with Eric Steinhauer (in German) on OA in higher education. There is also a transcript, which you can read in German or Google's English. Steinhauer is a lawyer and Vice Director of the Library at the University of Magdeburg. (Thanks to Klaus Graf.)
The German federal government's 2008 media and communications report (Medien- und Kommunikationsbericht der Bundesregierung 2008) was published last month, December 17, 2008. (Thanks to KoopTech.) It's a PDF, so I can't link to a machine translation.
At pp. 76-77, the government says it will re-evaluate a 2006 proposal for a secondary exploitation right for authors (Zweitverwertungsrecht für Urheber) of scientific research articles based on publicly-funded research. The proposal is based on an excellent idea of Gerd Hansen's which I wrote about in SOAN for June 2006:
The government rejected the idea in 2006 and German law does not currently incorporate it. The government is not promising to support it this time, but its willingness to re-evaluate it has to count as good news.
(Thanks to Sebastian Krujatz for help in understanding the government's position.)
Joe Gollner, The Emergence of Intelligent Content: The evolution of open content technologies and their significance, January 6, 2009. Apparently a preprint. (Thanks to Alles over Content Management.) Excerpt:
From the Introduction:
Comment. Publicly-funded digitization projects have a lot to learn from publicly-funded research projects. The same principle that requires OA for publicly-funded research requires OA for publicly-funded digitization, especially when the works being digitized are in the public domain. The principle applies when "all or part" of the funding is from taxpayers. When this principle would scare off private funders, and the public funding isn't enough to complete the project, then we can offer the private funder a temporary revenue stream from a toll booth on public property, in exchange for its investment, by analogy with the embargo periods on publicly-funded research. But like an embargo, this is a compromise with the public interest and must expire. If it doesn't expire, then for some fraction of the cost of digitization, private companies could essentially buy exclusive rights to works in the public domain. The damage is notable even when the originals are available in non-digital form. But the damage is severe when the originals, as here, are rare and fragile and could never be viewed by most users in non-digital form.
Mamiko Matsubayashi and six co-authors, Status of open access in the biomedical field in 2005, Journal of the Medical Library Association, January 2009.
Here's an unexpected finding not evident from the abstract:
PS: Also note that in first third of 2005, no form of the NIH policy had yet taken effect, and in the second two thirds only the low-compliance voluntary form was in effect.
Audra Mahlong and Siyabonga Africa, IP Bill locks down innovation, IT Web, January 15, 2009. Excerpt:
Comment. Tech transfer laws like this one do allow the patenting of otherwise patentable discoveries made by publicly-funded research, and to that extent they enclose more of the commons. We can debate their wisdom. But even if they expand enclosure and create a corrupting influence on universities, it's not clear that they impede OA to research itself. The Bayh-Dole Act in the US did not, for example, block the NIH policy, even though the law was 24 years old and well-entrenched by the time the NIH policy was first proposed. Looking at the other end of the stick, however, OA can advance the goals of tech transfer by making it easier for businesses to monitor new discoveries that might be ripe for investment and commercialization. That's why the European Commission tech-transfer report of April 2008 recommended OA for publicly-funded research.
OCLC Board of Trustees and Members Council to convene Review Board of Shared Data Creation and Stewardship, press release, January 13, 2009.
For more on the ARL review, see:
Michael Mandiberg, Howto Negotiate a Creative Commons License: Ten Steps, Michael Mandiberg, January 12, 2009. (Thanks to Creative Commons.)
Gavin Baker, How to negotiate a Creative Commons license in a work contract, A Journal of Insignificant Inquiry, January 14, 2009.
The ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit, which includes sections on OA-related topics such as digital repositories and journal economics, has been updated. From the January 13 press release:
The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) has released an updated version of its popular Scholarly Communication Toolkit in a new format and with updated content. The toolkit continues to provide context and background by summarizing key issues to offer quick, basic information on scholarly communication topics. It also links to examples of specific tools, including handouts, presentations and videos for libraries to adapt and use on their own campuses. ...
Grant Buckler, Science 2.0: New online tools may revolutionize research, CBC News, January 13, 2009. Discusses tagging, social networking, Nature Network, Nature Precedings, blogs, Twitter, open notebooks, and preprints. (Thanks to Bora Zivkovic.)
Hindawi Adds Support for the ePUB Digital Format, press release, January 12, 2009.
Head & Neck Oncology is a new peer-reviewed OA journal published by BioMed Central. The journal is the official publication of the Head & Neck Optical Diagnostics Society. See the January 12 announcement. The article-processing charge is £850 (€960, US$1290), subject to discount or waiver. Authors retain copyright, and articles are released under the Creative Commons Attribution License.
Comment. Like Obama CTO, which also has an OA proposal, the Citizen's Briefing Book allows you to vote for the posted proposals and add your own comments. Unlike Obama CTO, Citizen's Briefing Book lets you vote for all the proposals you like, not just your highest priorities. Log in, vote for the OA proposal, browse around and check out the other good ideas, and spread the word.
Ton Zijlstra, Open Government Data, Exciting New Project, Interdependent Thoughts, January 13, 2009. Excerpt:
Stevan Harnad, STM Publisher Briefing on Institution Repository Deposit Mandates, Open Access Archivangelism, January 13, 2009. The square brackets in this excerpt are Stevan's, not mine.
Comment. I support all of Stevan's responses. I also support his request to Michael Mabe to allow us to post quotations from the STM members-only briefing. If Mabe agrees, then I'll blog the briefing (again) and include some excerpts from the text.
Update (1/16/09). STM has given permission to quote from the statement, and Stevan has re-posted his response with quotations instead of paraphrases.
Update (1/17/09). Also see my comments on the STM briefing.
Update (1/18/09). Also see Heather Morrison's comments.
Christian Zimmermann, Institutional repositories and RePEc, The RePEc Blog, January 10, 2009.
Caroline Bayley, Buy none, get one free, BBC News, January 8, 2009. (Thanks to Matt Cockerill.) Excerpt:
Update. Here's a working link to the podcast interview. (Thanks to Matt Cockerill.)
Tove Faber Frandsen, The integration of open access journals in the scholarly communication system: Three science fields, Information Processing & Management, January 2009.
Only this abstract is free online at the journal site, but also see the self-archived preprint.
Tove Faber Frandsen, Attracted to open access journals: a bibliometric author analysis in the field of biology, Journal of Documentation, January 2009. (The DOI-based URL doesn't work for me at the moment.)
Only this abstract is free online from the journal site, but also see the self-archived preprint.
Update (1/15/09). Also see Tove Faber Frandsen's comment on Davis' post. Excerpt:
In his first year of office, George Bush issued an executive order allowing former presidents to block the public release of their papers. See our past posts on that order and the opposition it generated.
The first act passed by the House of Representatives in the first post-Bush session of Congress is the repeal of Bush's executive order. (Thanks to FGI.) If the Senate can pass its own version, Obama has promised the sign the bill.
PS: It's real. Change is coming.