“The 2018-2022 LIBER Strategy, which will steer LIBER’s development over the next five years, will support LIBER libraries in facing coming changes in the European working environment such as the various initiatives in advancing Open Science. It will also enable research in LIBER organisations to be world class. The leading role of LIBER brings added value to the implementation of the Strategy at a European level. …The term Open Science is not mentioned specifically in the Strategy. Instead, we emphasise innovative scholarly communication and digital skills and services, as well as research infrastructures to enable sustainable knowledge in the digital age…. Our Vision for the research landscape in 2022 is that the role of research libraries will lie in Powering Sustainable Knowledge in the Digital Age:
• Open Access is the predominant form of publishing;
• Research Data is Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR);
• Digital Skills underpin a more open and transparent research life cycle;
• Research Infrastructure is participatory, tailored and scaled to the needs of the diverse disciplines;
• The cultural heritage of tomorrow is built on today’s digital information….
Open Access of Research Publications: this theme will encompass developing innovative services on top of the repository network, developments regarding Open Access business models for journals and the role of libraries therein, and the possibilities for libraries as Open Access publishers and innovative publishing…Semantic Interoperability; Open and Linked Data: research libraries are experts in metadata and ontologies and need to take a leadership role and engage with other stakeholders to ensure interoperability and accessibility of content….”
“The principles are based on the experiences of LIBER libraries in the past two years, and aim to guide libraries and consortia as they shift from a reader-pays model (subscription licensing) to an author-pays model based on Article Processing Charges (APC)….”
In the letter, LIBER and 14 other organisations express particular alarm at the potential impact of Article 11, which relates to Ancillary Copyright, and Article 13, which relates to filtering user-uploaded content, of the draft Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market.
“LIBER is in charge of running the OpenAIRE FP7 Post-Grant Open Access Pilot.
Approved requests for the FP7 post-grant OA pilot. The pilot recently completed its first year of operation, and has already committed its first €1 million in funding, out of €4 million total. Some results of the work done so far are included in a progress report.”
“Interested in working on everything related to Open Science?! Do you enjoy working in an international and dynamic environment?? Are you aware of recent developments in the research sector? Do you have a talent for working with stakeholders from different countries? Come join the LIBER team. LIBER is looking for a EU Projects Officer, based at our office in the National Library of The Netherlands. LIBER is involved in EU Projects in the areas of open access, copyright and text and data mining, digital heritage, research data management and research data infrastructures. You will be joining a small and international team of highly motivated individuals and must be comfortable working both as part of a team and autonomously. This position is perfect for someone who is passionate about issues relating to Open Science and research libraries and is seeking to build a solid foundation in this area, whilst also building on strong project management skills …”
“After a month of intense conversations and negotiations, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) will bring the ‘Fair Access to Science and Technology Research (FASTR) Act’ up for mark-up on Wednesday, July 29th. The language that will be considered is an amended version of FASTR, officially known as the ‘Johnson-Carper Substitute Amendment,’ which was officially filed by the HSGAC leadership late on Friday afternoon, per committee rules. There are two major changes from the original bill language to be particularly aware of. Specifically, the amendment Replaces the six month embargo period with ‘no later than 12 months, but preferably sooner’ as anticipated; and Provides a mechanism for stakeholders to petition federal agencies to ‘adjust’ the embargo period if the12 months does not serve ‘the public, industries, and the scientific community.’ We understand that these modifications were made in order accomplish a number of things: Satisfy the requirement of a number of Members of HSGAC that the language more closely track that of the OSTP Directive; Meet the preference of the major U.S. higher education associations for a maximum 12 month embargo; Ensure that, for the first time, a number of scientific societies will drop their opposition for the bill; and Ensure that any petition process an agency may enable is focused on serving the interests of the public and the scientific community …”
“Impact is multi-dimensional, the routes by which impact occur are different across disciplines and sectors, and impact changes over time. Jane Tinkler argues that if institutions like HEFCE specify a narrow set of impact metrics, more harm than good would come to universities forced to limit their understanding of how research is making a difference. But qualitative and quantitative indicators continue to be an incredible source of learning for how impact works in each of our disciplines, locations or sectors.”
“Open access for monographs and book chapters is a relatively new area of publishing, and there are many ways of approaching it. With this in mind, a recent publication from the Wellcome Trust aims to provide some guidance for publishers to consider when developing policies and processes for open access books. The Wellcome Trust recognises that implementation around publishing monographs and book chapters open access is in flux, and invites publishers to email Cecy Marden at firstname.lastname@example.org with any suggestions for further guidance that would be useful to include in this document. ‘Open Access Monographs and Book Chapters: A practical guide for publishers’ is available to download as a pdf from the Wellcome Trust website.”
“The purpose of this post is to shed some light on a specific issue in the transition to open access that particularly affects small and low-cost publishers and to suggest one strategy to address this issue. In the words of one Resource Requirements interviewee: ‘So the other set of members that we used to have about forty library members , but when we went to open access online, we lost the whole bunch of libraries. Yeah, so basically we sent everybody ,you know, a letter saying we are going to open access online, the annual membership is only $30, we hope you will continue to support us even though there are no longer print journals, and then a whole flu of cancellations came in from a whole bunch of libraries, which we had kind of thought might happen but given how cheap we are, I have to say I was really disappointed when it indeed did happen especially from whole bunch of [deleted] libraries [for which our journal is extremely relevant]. I was going, seriously $30?’ Comments: for a university library, a society membership fee, when not required for journal subscriptions, may be difficult to justify from an accounting perspective. $30 is a small cost; however, for a university the administrative work of tracking such memberships and cutting a check every year likely exceeds the $30 cost. With 40 library members at a cost of $30, the total revenue for this journal from this source was $1,200. A university or university library could sponsor this amount at less than the cost of many an article processing charge. The university and library where the faculty member is located have a support program for open access journals; clearly the will, and some funding, is there. One of the challenges is transitioning subscription dollars to support for open access, as I address in my 2013 First Monday article. Following is one suggestion for libraries, or for faculty to suggest to their libraries: why not engage your faculty who are independent or society publishers to gain support for cancellations or tough negotiations and lower prices for the big deals of large, highly profitable commercial publishers that I argue are critical to redirect funding to our own publishing activities? Here is one scenario that may help to explain the potential …”
[From Google’s English] “UKB , the consortium of thirteen university libraries and the National Library, the objectives of The Hague Declaration endorsed by signing the joint declaration. All signatories state that there are no copyright restrictions are scientific results and research data. Everyone should be able to freely analyze facts and data.Licensing and copyright rules may not raise barriers before. The knowledge economy has an interest in global open access or open science. According to the statement must be contained in the European copyright rules that authors the right to (re) use of data and texts not lose by signing a contract with a publisher …”