Last November, Dan Hunter of the Wharton School wrote an open letter to the California Law Review (CLR) asking it to reconsider its OA archiving policy. As a result, CLR did reconsider its policy and then, in late March, changed it. Here's an excerpt from the new policy, which is a one-year experiment for next year's issues: "CLR's contract will still require authors to remove working drafts from SSRN upon publication in the California Law Review. However, upon publication, CLR will also provide authors with .pdfs of their articles in their final worded forms and give authors the right to post these .pdfs on SSRN. The .pdfs may remain up indefinitely, so long as they and SSRN's search engines remain free and accessible to the general public." SSRN is the Social Science Research Network, the OA repository of choice for law professors. Thanks to Dan for his good work and kudos to CLR for adopting this helpful policy. (PS: CLR now offers its authors an opportunity that most other law reviews do not. That's a good reason for CLR authors to take advantage of it and for other law reviews to follow suit.)
Posted by
Peter Suber at 6/07/2004 12:22:00 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.
