Contracts Library – SPARC

“A number of libraries and consortia have provided the full text of Big Deal licenses. These provide useful information about the terms and conditions publisher may seek to include in their standard agreements. For tips on how to acquire additional contracts not listed here, see our “Freedom of Information Requests” guide. If you have an agreement that can be lawfully shared here, please contact us. We’ve also compilled tips on pushing back against confidentiality clauses and NDAs. …”

Christian Gutknecht on Twitter: “5 months after my FOI request, we finally know what the @unil and the @HEPVaud is paying for Elsevier. #openaccess @OpenScienceUNIL @freiedokumente @smetille https://t.co/J0TT18FTkj https://t.co/wZ9GmLexJb” / Twitter

From Google’s English:  “Your correspondence received on October 11, 2020 has captured our full attention. We have the pleasure to send you the requested information contained in the following document:

• Read & Publish pilot agreement between swissuniversities and Elsevier (“Elsevier

Subscription Agreement ”) for the years 2020-2023, page 12.

The amount that the BCU Lausanne will pay for the perimeter of the University of Lausanne (incl.

HEP Vaud) for the years 2020-2021-2022-2023 for this license amounts to:

2020: EUR 1’229’064.32

(excl. VAT)

2021: EUR 1’253’645.61

(excl. VAT)

2022: EUR 1’281’728.45

(excl. VAT)

2023: EUR 1’307’248.11

(excl. VAT)

 

We specify that the 2022 and 2023 prices are estimates because they are subject to correction in

according to the effective number of articles published by the University of Lausanne in 2020 and 2021.

Within the meaning of article 12 of the law of 24 September 2002 on information (Llnfo; BLV 170.21),

we are required to provide you with an answer within 15 days of the

receipt of your request. However, given the difficulty in obtaining validations

required, we inform you that we have rendered our decision upon receipt of the

written confirmations from the Data Protection and Right to Information Authority and

the Administrative and Public Law Court of the Cantonal Court that no appeal has been registered.

In compliance with article 11 Llnfo, we hereby confirm that no fee

you will not be asked for the work done to date following your request.”

The first statewide, open access dataset tracking public records requests in New Jersey – ScienceDirect

Abstract:  State freedom of information laws are vital mechanisms for providing public access to government records and supporting civic engagement through the effectuation of a public policy of transparency at the state level within the United States, not unlike their federal counterpart, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). New Jersey state law facilitates public access to government records under the Open Public Records Act (OPRA). Codified at N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq., OPRA applies to state, county and local public authorities but exempts the judicial and legislative branches from its disclosure requirements. Since OPRA took effect in 2002, it has been difficult to track the full extent of law’s impact across New Jersey’s 21 counties, 565 municipalities, and numerous state agencies, school districts and independent authorities, all of which must individually respond to requests under the law. To the best of the author’s knowledge, no official source has compiled detailed metadata tracking the content and disposition of OPRA requests at the state, regional and municipal levels within New Jersey using individual requests, and authorities rarely proactively disclose their responses to requests they receive, necessitating further data collection to support research into the impacts of this law. This article presents the OPRAmachine dataset: data containing detailed metadata on public records requests submitted to state & local public authorities in New Jersey since October 2017 collected through the implementation of information and communication technologies (ICT) to facilitate the freedom of information request process. The data was collected using an open-source web interface that allowed users to submit an OPRA request to public authorities, with responses stored in a database and made available via the internet. After their request received a response, users were asked to answer a single survey question describing the status of their request, with their answer used to classify the request. Descriptive statistics, tables and frequencies were produced for the dataset and are included in this article. These data will assist state policymakers and other interested parties with assessing trends in OPRA requests across multiple types of public authorities & geographic regions. These data can inform more efficient government records management procedures, foster civic engagement by increasing government transparency and can inform the development of possible reforms to the OPRA law by showing trends in requests & responses that can be used to evaluate the law’s implementation throughout the state.

 

Documenting COVID-19

“Documenting COVID-19 is a repository of searchable documents related to the COVID-19 pandemic obtained through state open-records laws and the Freedom of Information Act. Click on a state for details about the 57 document sets available as of July 14, 2020, and news coverage that have used those materials….”

Documenting COVID-19

“Documenting COVID-19 is a repository of searchable documents related to the COVID-19 pandemic obtained through state open-records laws and the Freedom of Information Act. Click on a state for details about the 57 document sets available as of July 14, 2020, and news coverage that have used those materials….”

FOIA: Film industry lobbies South Africa’s Parliament to suspend Copyright Amendment Bill | Knowledge Ecology International

“Through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) has obtained 311 pages of correspondence between officials from the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) and employees of the Motion Picture Association (MPA), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and other entities including law firms on matters regarding South Africa and copyright policy. The FOIA request was filed by Claire Cassedy on October 29, 2019. The 311 page document is available here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wUYHzgwtYUaYiMLLeGfV7ucxk5Q1tpu0/view?usp=sharing

The correspondence dates from December 2018 to November 2019 and reveals an assiduous campaign mounted by the MPA and RIAA to thwart the passage of South Africa’s Copyright Amendment Bill in the South African Parliament and to prevents its signing by the President of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa. The MPA and RIIA, working in concert with the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) petitioned USTR to impose higher tariffs on South Africa (by revoking the Generalized System of Preferences) over concerns with, inter alia, the fair use provisions contained in South Africa’s Copyright Amendment Bill….”

FOIA: Film industry lobbies South Africa’s Parliament to suspend Copyright Amendment Bill | Knowledge Ecology International

“Through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) has obtained 311 pages of correspondence between officials from the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) and employees of the Motion Picture Association (MPA), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and other entities including law firms on matters regarding South Africa and copyright policy. The FOIA request was filed by Claire Cassedy on October 29, 2019. The 311 page document is available here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wUYHzgwtYUaYiMLLeGfV7ucxk5Q1tpu0/view?usp=sharing

The correspondence dates from December 2018 to November 2019 and reveals an assiduous campaign mounted by the MPA and RIAA to thwart the passage of South Africa’s Copyright Amendment Bill in the South African Parliament and to prevents its signing by the President of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa. The MPA and RIIA, working in concert with the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) petitioned USTR to impose higher tariffs on South Africa (by revoking the Generalized System of Preferences) over concerns with, inter alia, the fair use provisions contained in South Africa’s Copyright Amendment Bill….”

Journal subscription expenditure in the UK 2010-2019 | Zenodo

“This dataset contains payments made by UK higher education institutions for access to academic journals from ten publishers from 2010-2019. The data was obtained by sending Freedom of Information (FOI) requests to institutions through the website What Do They Know. The requests, and all original source data, can be found at https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/user/stuart_lawson/requests.

The total expenditure with these ten publishers from 2010-2019 was over £982 million. This includes some gaps in the data, so the true figure is almost certainly greater than £1 billion.

The data was originally produced in three stages:

– Data for 2010-14 was published at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1186832

– Data for 2015-16 was published at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.4542433

– Data for 2017-19 was published at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3828461

These three datasets contain direct links to the original FOI requests. The present dataset is a combination of these three datasets and contains no additional data….”

Journal subscription expenditure in the UK 2017-2019 | Zenodo

“This dataset contains payments made by UK higher education institutions for access to academic journals from ten publishers from 2017-2019. The data was obtained by sending Freedom of Information requests to institutions through the website https://whatdotheyknow.com. The total expenditure with these ten publishers from 2017-2019 was over £330 million….”

 

The Neues Museum is claiming copyright over 3D-printing files of the Nefertiti bust.

“The museum never quite clarified its relation to the scans. But earlier this week, Wenman released the files he received from the museum online for anyone to download. The 3D digital version is a perfect replica of the original 3,000-year-old bust, with one exception. The Neues Museum etched a cop..yright license into the bottom of the bust itself, claiming the authority to restrict how people might use the file. The museum was trying to pretend that it owned a copyright in the scan of a 3,000-year-old sculpture created 3,000 miles away….

While the copyright status of 3D scans of public domain works is currently more complex in the EU, Article 14 of the recently passed Copyright Directive is explicitly designed to clarify that digital versions of public domain works cannot be protected by copyright. …

The most important part is that adding these restrictions runs counter to the entire mission of museums. Museums do not hold our shared cultural heritage so that they can become gatekeepers. They hold our shared cultural heritage as stewards in order to make sure we have access to our collective history. Etching scary legal words in the bottom of a work in your collection in the hopes of scaring people away from engaging with it is the opposite of that.”