“Policy should incentivise. In the case of the UKSCL model institutional open access policy there are:
Incentives for the academic: the retention of academic freedom to publish in the venue of choice knowing that rights have legally been retained in order to meet funder open access aims
Incentives for the library and finance directors: reassurance that funder mandates are not accompanied by significant new financial burdens for the institution
And finally, incentives for publishers: to work with us so that an affordable transition can be achieved, and so that it is the Version of Record which is freely and publicly available on publication.
Finally, If I were to have one wish, it would be this: that, having done all this work to establish this legal approach to solving first, the OA policy stack, and now, the challenges for implementing cOAlition S aims, that the policy was not, in the end, needed, and that we were instead able to find an affordable and workable route to full and immediate open access….”
“PA members are deeply concerned about a proposal from a scholarly communications working group to introduce a new model licence within HEIs. The SCL would give the implementing university a non-exclusive licence to make work open access on publication, in conflict with any green open licence in place with a publisher, and with an option for a researcher to secure a waiver from the HEI should the publisher require it.
Principal concerns are the significant administrative burden on researchers, institutions and publishers that could arise as waivers are requested; a conflict with UK policy on OA; the way the SCL seeks immediate non-commercial re-use rights for all UK research outputs; and the potential limit it places on the choice of researchers over where to publish.
The documents on this page set out the publisher position. …”
From Google’s English: “Many US universities can publish scientific articles directly open access. They makeuse the Harvard open access licensing model for this. This article examines whether the Harvardlicensing model under Dutch law is permitted. That appears to be the case. That makes it for authors and institutions in the Netherlands very easy to meet the open access requirements of grant providers,as recently formulated in Plan S.”
From Google’s English: “Many US universities can publish scientific articles directly open access. For this they use the Harvard open access licensing model. This article examines whether the Harvard licensing model is permitted under Dutch law. That appears to be the case. This makes it very easy for authors and institutions in the Netherlands to comply with the open access requirements of grant providers, as they have recently been formulated in Plan S.”
Abstract: One of the cornerstones of scientific advancement is academic, peer-review publishing. Published articles are critical to advancing scientific research and disseminating verified results to other scientists and the public. Despite its importance, the copyright issues surrounding publishing are poorly understood by many of its scientific authors. In an effort to demystify and empower scientific authors, this Note discusses copyright ownership during the peer-review publishing process, loss of author copyright through publishing agreements, and remedies authors may employ to protect and distribute their works.
“Over the past decade, colleges and universities have been adopting institutional open access (OA) policies that encourage, direct, or give rights to authors to make their research publicly available in institutional repositories (IRs). These networked databases are often created to serve these OA policies, distributing an author’s research to a global online audience. Without copyright law, these policies and the supporting IRs could not exist: copyright law is the engine of a successful OA policy and thereby a successful IR. In particular, US copyright law features a statute that allows creators to transfer rights for a work without actually giving up total control of it. These non-exclusive rights are the foundation of the OA movement in the US.
This chapter begins with a brief introduction to the benefits and management of OA policies, focusing on their basis in copyright law and author rights. It continues with an examination of the ongoing disagreements among OA practitioners and publishers about what OA actually means and how the term “open access” can pose communication and workflow challenges for those working with institutional OA policies. Within this context, the authors describe common OA policy workflows and the activities librarians undertake to determine what version of an article can be deposited in an IR as well as how to communicate these nuances to campus stakeholders. It concludes with advice on how an IR can be used to advocate for author rights and comply with copyright law.”
“The ‘Framework’ is aligned with developing European Commission policy in this area and is structured accordingly. The European Commission Recommendation of 25 April 2018 on access to and preservation of scientific information asks Member States to ‘set and implement clear policies (as detailed in national action plans)’ covering: Open Access to Publications; Management of Research Data; Preservation and re-use of scientific information; Infrastructures for Open Research; Skills and Competencies; Incentives and Rewards….”
“With effect from 2021, all scholarly publications on the results from research funded by public or private grants provided by national, regional and international research councils and funding bodies, must be published in Open Access Journals, on Open Access Platforms, or made immediately available through Open Access Repositories without embargo….”