European survey on scholarly practices and digital needs in the arts and humanities – Highlights Report | Zenodo

“Between 10-15% of respondents reported very frequent use of open access journals or publications, institutional portals and repositories, personal blogs or websites, and scholarly communities such as Academia and ResearchGate, to disseminate their work. A larger percentage, between 35-45%, use this ‘tetrad’ of dissemination channels regularly. On the other hand, eight out of ten state that they have used open content journals or publication, albeit seldom….”

Elsevier klagt gegen Forschernetzwerk Researchgate – buchreport

English Translation (Google): Elsevier sues against research network Researchgate

“Der Wissenschaftsriese Elsevier geht gemeinsam mit der American Chemical Society (ACS) juristisch gegen das Forschernetzwerk Researchgate vor.”

English Translation (Google): “The scientific giant Elsevier and the American Chemical Society (ACS) are taking legal action against the research network Researchgate .”

The Center for Open Science and MarXiv Launch Branded Preprint Service

The Center for Open Science (COS) and MarXiv have launched a new preprint service for the earth sciences, sources for both organizations announced today. The new service, called MarXiv, provides free, open access, open source archives for the ocean conservation and marine climate sciences.

African Academy of Sciences | AAS Open Research | News

“The African Academy of Sciences, in partnership with F1000, is launching a publication platform, AAS Open Research, to enable AAS funded and affiliated researchers to publish immediately and without barriers. AAS Open Research will showcase African research on the global stage in an innovative and transparent way. It will launch in early 2018, AAS- affiliated include its Fellows, Affiliates and those funded through the funding and science agenda platform that the Academy created with the NEPAD Agency, the Alliance for Accelerating Excellence in Science in Africa (AESA) will be able to publish there.”

In reversal, Cambridge University Press restores articles after China censorship row – The Washington Post

“Cambridge University Press reversed course Monday after facing a major backlash from academics over its decision to bow to Chinese government demands to censor an important academic journal.

The British-based publisher announced Friday it had removed 300 articles and book reviews from a version of the China Quarterly website available in China at the request of the government. But on Monday, it rescinded that decision after outrage from the international academic community….”

The China Quarterly follow-up statement | Cambridge University Press

“Following a clear order from its Chinese importer, Cambridge University Press reluctantly took the decision to block, within China, 315 articles in The China Quarterly. This decision was taken as a temporary measure pending discussion with the academic leadership of the University of Cambridge, and pending a scheduled meeting with the Chinese importer in Beijing.

The academic leadership of the University has now reviewed this action in advance of the meeting in China later this week. Academic freedom is the overriding principle on which the University of Cambridge is based. Therefore, while this temporary decision was taken in order to protect short-term access in China to the vast majority of the Press’s journal articles, the University’s academic leadership and the Press have agreed to reinstate the blocked content, with immediate effect, so as to uphold the principle of academic freedom on which the University’s work is founded….”

Petition · Christopher Balding: Petition Cambridge University Press Not to Censor China Articles · Change.org

“As academics and China focused academics, we are disturbed by the request by the Chinese government for Cambridge University Press to censor articles from the China Quarterly.  As academics, we believe in the free and open exchange of ideas and information on all topics not just those we agree with.  It is disturbing to academics and universities world wide that China is attempting to export its censorship on topics that do not fit its preferred narrative.  

We call upon Cambridge University Press to refuse the censorship request not just for the China Quarterly but on any other topics, journals or publication that have been requested by the Chinese government.

If Cambridge University Press acquiesces to the demands of the Chinese government, we as academics and universities reserve the right to pursue other actions including boycotts of Cambridge University Press and related journals. …”

The Open Research Pilot project | Open Research: Adventures from the front line

“The Open Research Pilot project is a two year experiment where researchers at Cambridge University are trying to work as openly as possible. The project is a collaboration with the Wellcome Trust Open Research team and the exchange of experiences and ideas is helping both sides of the collaboration….

The researchers, Wellcome Trust and Cambridge open research teams met for a kick off meeting on 27 January 2017 to officially start the two-year project. Each research group was appointed a facilitator – a dedicated member of the Cambridge open research team to support researchers throughout the project. Research groups will meet with their facilitators on a monthly basis in order to discuss shareable research outputs and to decide on best ways to disseminate them. Every six months all project members will meet to discuss barriers to sharing outputs that have been identified through the pilot and to assess the progress of the Project.

One of the main goals of the project is to learn what the barriers and incentives are for open research and to share these findings with others interested in the subject to inform policy development. Therefore, we will be regularly publishing blog posts with case studies describing what we have discovered while working together. There will also be an update from each research group every six months….”