“This is the first of two related posts. The second will describe our current thinking about open access. (Watch for it around Open Access Week, 2020.) We’re looking forward and want to start by showing where we’ve come from.
For now, this brief history focuses mostly on Harvard’s thinking about subscription journal prices and Harvard’s open access (OA) policies. There are many other OA initiatives at Harvard we might add later, for example on courseware, data, digitization, open-source software, and publishing, as well as our partnerships with larger, multi-institutional initiatives. …”
“Rights retention in scholarly works can include a spectrum of copyright arrangements, reuse rights, and machine readability4 . Copyright retention by authors or universities for scholarly works is becoming preferred by some funders and advocates. Ideally, these changes would take place on the national level. However, recommendations for legislative or national policy change are outside the scope of this report as they require extensive consultation with stakeholders and government. This briefing report has therefore focused on the potential to achieve reuse rights retention in institutional IP policies only….”
“In most cases and for most of the published research Duke produces, we aim to disseminate these works with no direct financial return; no royalty. If possible, our authors generally want no financial barrier to stand in the way of engagement with their research, operating under the idea that more and faster progress will be made without those barriers. In many cases, we find ourselves licensing around the controls that copyright law automatically provides. For example, more than ten years ago, Duke Faculty voted to adopt an institutional open access policy that provides for free, widespread distribution of research articles that Duke faculty have authored….
Given our interest in widespread dissemination of ideas, for research and academic work our strong preference is a system that is biased toward keeping content up online unless there is strong evidence that an infringement has occurred. The current notice and takedown system does not always accomplish this goal….
First, for some academic works, the ownership of rights is far from clear. Although authors are the holders of those rights initially, they are often asked to license them away at least in part through publishing contracts that are confusing and vary significantly from journal to journal and which can change with some frequency. As a result, some academic authors are unsure of whether they are legally permitted to share their own work online under the terms of their publishing agreement. Many research articles are also subject to pre-existing licenses that attach automatically upon creation—for example, at Duke under our Open Access policy—which provide that authors and their institutions retain certain rights to share and reuse their work. My experience with takedown requests we receive at Duke is that publishers do not take into account pre-existing open access licenses even though their existence is widely known….
Second, and perhaps the most important thing I can convey, is how important fair use is for research, teaching, and for libraries that support those functions….
Section 512 does not explicitly address how fair use factors into the notice and takedown process….[I]n practice we know that in many instances automated content identification systems are the first method of assessment, and they do not handle fair use assertions well….”
“THIS CHAPTER OUTLINES THE STEPS TAKEN TO IMPLEMENT AN open access policy at a public, midsize, four-year institution [The College at Brockport]. There is no “one size fts all” in policy-making, but the authors intend to provide motivation for others to continue to work on policies that can enhance the scholarly profle at their schools….”
“One big change brought on by Covid-19 is that virtually all the scientific research being produced about it is free to read. Anyone can access the many preliminary findings that scholars are posting on “preprint servers.” Data are shared openly via a multitude of different channels. Scientific journals that normally keep their articles behind formidable paywalls have been making an exception for new research about the virus, as well as much (if not all) older work relevant to it.
This response to a global pandemic is heartening and may well speed that pandemic to its end. But after that, what happens with scientific communication? Will everything go back behind the journal paywalls?
Well, no. Open-access advocates in academia have been pushing for decades to make more of their work publicly available and paywall-free, and in recent years they’ve been joined by the government agencies and large foundations that fund much scientific research. Covid-19 has accelerated this shift. I’m pretty sure there’s no going back. …”
“3. Brock Scholars are expected to deposit an electronic copy of their academic journal articles in Brock’s Open Access Repository (“Brock University Digital Repository”) by the date of publication. If needed, articles may be embargoed within the repository upon deposit to meet time periods required by publishers.
4. Each Brock Scholar who deposits their academic journal articles in the Brock University Digital Repository grants the University the non-exclusive permission to archive and disseminate those articles through the Repository, provided that the articles are properly attributed to the authors, and that dissemination is for non-commercial purposes only.
5. Brock Scholars who choose not to deposit an academic journal article in the Brock University Digital Repository shall notify the University Library through the opt-out form made available through the Brock University Library….”
“CARL has created this Institutional Open Access Policy Template and Toolkit to help prepare those wishing to engage in this activity on their campus.
The tools included in this toolkit are designed to support first efforts to create an institution-wide policy, but can also be helpful in developing faculty- or department-specific policies, or in expanding an institution’s existing policies….”
“The Canadian Association of Research Libraries is pleased to announce the release of its Institutional Open Access Policy Template for Canadian institutions, which is accompanied by a toolkit to help prepare those wishing to develop such a policy on their campus….”
“The University at Buffalo (UB, university) is committed to providing the greatest possible reach and impact of the research and scholarly and creative works produced by its faculty, staff, and students. The university recognizes the value of and supports university authors retaining the rights to their intellectual property, while encouraging them to make their works freely and widely available. The university endorses the practice of university authors depositing a preprint, post-print, or final version of each scholarly or creative work in an open access (OA) digital repository.
Participating university authors grant to the university permission to make available copies of their scholarly and creative works (and related products, when possible), and to exercise a copyright license to those works for the purposes of preserving and making them freely and widely available in an OA repository. More specifically, participating university authors retain any rights not already transferred to a publisher and grant to the university a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license to reproduce and distribute their scholarly or creative works, in any format, for the purposes of preserving and making works openly available.
University authors reserve the right to choose where to publish their work and whether to make it freely and openly available to the public, subject to copyright law and publisher sharing policies. This is an opt-in rather than an opt-out policy for university authors….”