Openness

Amsciforum 2015-06-05

Summary:

"William Gunn (Mendeley) wrote: '[E]verything you could post publicly and immediately before, you can do so now. There's a NEW category of author manuscript, one which now comes with Elsevier-supplied metadata specifying the license and the embargo expiration date, that is subject to the embargo. The version the author sent to the journal, even post peer-review, can be posted publicly and immediately, which wasn't always the case before…' Actually in the 2004-2012 Elsevier policy it was the case: Elsevier authors could post their post-peer-review versions publicly and immediately in their institutional repositories. This was then obfuscated by Elsevier from 2012-2014 with double-talk, and now has been formally embargoed in 2015. Elsevier authors can, however, post their post-peer-review versions publicly and immediately on their institutional home page or blog, as well as on Arxiv or RePeC, with an immediate CC-BY-NC-ND license. That does in fact amount to the same thing as the 2004-2012 policy (in fact better, because of the license), but it is embedded in such a smoke-screen of double-talk and ambiguity that most authors and institutional OA policy-makers and repository-managers will be unable to understand and implement it. My main objection is to Elsevier’s smokescreen. This could all be stated and implemented so simply if Elsevier were acting in good faith. But to avoid any risk to itself, Elsevier prefers to keep research access at risk with complicated, confusing edicts."

Link:

http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1158-Openness.html

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » Amsciforum
Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » abernard102@gmail.com
Eric Bakovic's Hub » Open Access Archivangelism

Tags:

publishing reform

Date tagged:

06/05/2015, 21:33

Date published:

06/05/2015, 03:49