Budapest Open Access Initiative      

Budapest Open Access Initiative: BOAI Forum Archive

[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [prev] [next] [options] [help]

boaiforum messages

[BOAI] Re: Elsevier Still Onside of Angels on Immediate, Unembargoed Green OA Self-Archiving By Its Authors

From: David Prosser <david.prosser AT rluk.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 12:57:50 +0100


Threading: [BOAI] Elsevier Still Onside of Angels on Immediate, Unembargoed Green OA Self-Archiving By Its Authors from amsciforum AT gmail.com
      • This Message


--Apple-Mail-20-580530814
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=windows-1252

> Since -- exactly like Springer's (hedge-free) rights-retention policy =
(and countless others) -- Elsevier's policy does indeed formally =
recognize right of the authors of the articles published in 2000 =
Elsevier journals to make them immediately OA (unembargoed), I would say =
that the "angelic" tag was fully earned.

Actually, they don't.  See:

http://www.elsevier.com/authors/author-rights-and-responsibilities

Penultimate row of the column:

'Mandated deposit or deposit in or posting to subject-oriented or =
centralized repositories'

for 'accepted author manuscripts' 'Yes under specific agreement between =
Elsevier and the repository**'

To me that means 'no' if no agreement between Elsevier and the =
repository.  The exception is arXiv where Elsevier obviously feel the =
horse has bolted and there is no point trying to close that stable door.=20=


David




On 3 May 2013, at 12:25, Stevan Harnad wrote:

> On 2013-05-03, at 2:57 AM, David Prosser <david.prosser AT 
rluk.ac.uk> =
wrote:
>=20
>> I agree with Andras and I cannot see how any publisher who has a =
policy along the lines of:
>>=20
>> You may make your author version freely available without embargo =
unless you are mandated (by funder or institution) to do so, in which =
case you may not make your author version freely available without =
embargo
>>=20
>> can be described as being on the side of the Angels.  We may dismiss =
such a policy as FUD or even claim that it is illogical and =
unenforceable - as Stevan does - but we cannot possibly describe it as =
angelic.
>=20
> Since -- exactly like Springer's (hedge-free) rights-retention policy =
(and countless others) -- Elsevier's policy does indeed formally =
recognize right of the authors of the articles published in 2000 =
Elsevier journals to make them immediately OA (unembargoed), I would say =
that the "angelic" tag was fully earned.
>=20
> The tag is not earned for the FUD. The right right response to the FUD =
is to ignore it.
>=20
> Let's not waste time and divert attention to the question of whether =
they are Cherubim or Seraphim: The fact that Elsevier give their Green =
Light to immediate, unembargoed OA-provision by their authors is what =
matters (to those who care more about OA than about journal pricing or =
publisher boycotting).
>=20
> Harrumph!
>=20
> Stevan
>=20
>> On 2 May 2013, at 08:17, Andras Holl wrote:
>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Dear Stevan,=20
>>>=20
>>> Regardless however right you are, Elsevier's play with words =
succesfully confuses=20
>>> a large number of authors, who do not deposit because of this.=20
>>>=20
>>> Andras=20
>>>=20
>>> On Wed, 1 May 2013 20:24:46 -0400, Stevan Harnad wrote=20
>>> > On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 5:10 PM, BISSET J. =
<james.bisset AT durham.ac.uk> wrote:=20
>>> >=20
>>> > =20
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > =46rom our understanding of Elsevier policy this is not the 
case =
in two instances:=20
>>> >=20
>>> > 1) if the institution requires deposit in their institutional 
=
repository=20
>>> > 2) if the funder requires open access.
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Dear James,=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Elsevier rights agreements state that authors retains the 
right to =
make their final drafts OA immediately upon publication: no embargo.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > I will answer your more detailed questions below, but let me 
=
already give you a simple general answer from which all the specific =
ones can be deduced.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > If a contract says you have the right to do X, then it cannot 
go =
on to stipulate that you only have the "right to exercise" your right 
to =
do X if you are not required to exercise it. That is empty double-talk, =
and can and should be completely ignored as empty. A right is a right; =
you either have it or you don't.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Moreover, Elsevier authors do not need Elsevier's permission 
to =
deposit in their IRs any more than they need Elsevier's permission to go =
to the WC! =20
>>> >=20
>>> > The only thing at issue is the right to make the deposit =
immediately OA (i.e., free online). And Elsevier (like Springer, and =
about 60% of all publishers) state that the author retains the right to =
make the final draft OA immediately upon publication: no OA embargo.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > So all authors with any sense should go ahead and exercise 
that =
formally endorsed right that they retain!=20
>>> >=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > I have an email from Elsevier today confirming that in either 
of =
the two cases above, immediate deposit is permitted but open access is =
not permitted until [after] an embargo period...=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Elsevier is just playing on words here. As I said, the right 
to =
deposit is not at issue. Elsevier does not have any say over where I put =
my final draft. =20
>>> >=20
>>> > The only right at issue is the right to make the deposit =
immediately OA (i.e., free online).=20
>>> >=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Additionally, Durham has reissued its mandate for 
self-archiving, =
including a requirement that only those deposited (not necessarily open =
access) can be used for consideration in promotion or probation (the =
'how' this will work us still being looked at - So this has not yet been =
registered anywhere).=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Bravo on adopting the optimal institutional OA mandate. Soon 
we =
can hope that the Durham mandate will be reinforced by the very same =
mandate from HEFCE/REF: only articles whose final drafts were deposited =
in the author's institutional repository immediately upon acceptance for =
publication will be eligible for submission to the next REF (2020).=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Institutional and HEFCE immediate-deposit mandates can then =
mutually reinforce one another, and institutions will be able to devise =
a simple mechanism for monitoring and verifying  compliance.=20
>>> > =20
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Because we now mandate deposit, Elsevier have indicated we 
cannot =
make any publications open access until we sign an agreement with them - =
which includes restricting access from immediate upon publication (as it =
was without a mandate) to the embargo periods mentioned above.=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > This is very interesting: Have you asked yourself why 
Elsevier is =
asking for a second agreement? Isn't the author's signed agreement =
enough, if it is really sufficient to accord him a right yet prevent him =
from exercising that right?=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Well obviously not, because of the double-talk I just 
mentioned. =
In an agreement with the clause=20
>>> >=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Clause C1: "You retain the right to do X"=20
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > followed by the clause =20
>>> >=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Clause C2: "but you may not "exercise your 
right" to do X if you =
are required to do X"
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > you are sanctioning a contradiction. Logically speaking (and 
=
contracts must obey logic as surely as they must obey the law), this is =
pretty much the same as simply saying:=20
>>> >=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Clause C1: "You may do X"=20
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > and=20
>>> >=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Clause C2: "You may not do X."
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > With a logical contradiction, you can pretty much take your 
choice =
and do whatever you like, because anything (and the opposite of =
anything) follows from a contradiction.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > A good choice would be to read sequentially, follow Clause 1, 
and =
simply ignore Clause 2, which just says the opposite. If challenged, =
cite clause 1.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > And this is the real reason that Elsevier is not comfortable 
with =
relying on its signed author rights agreement with its authors as =
grounds for restraining them form doing what the retain the right to do =
if they are required to do it. So they instead try to get a signature to =
yet another agreement, from yet another party -- the university -- a =
further agreement tjat would have the (failed) intended effect of the =
author rights agreement: The institution must sign that it may not =
require the author to exercise his right to provide immediate OA.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Solution? Simple: The university should not sign! =20
>>> >=20
>>> > If Elsevier really thinks its author agreement has already 
seen to =
it that mandated authors may not provide immediate OA if required by his =
university, then there is no call for the university to sign a thing.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Of course, this is not quite the way Elsevier goes about 
trying to =
get the university to sign: It proposes a contingency, in confidential =
pricing negotiations, between the subscription deal it offers the =
university, and whether or not they require immediate OA.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > This would be unethical if it weren't so ludicrous.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Of course the university should not sign away its right to 
mandate =
immediate-deposit because of a subscription-deal contingency.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > But the solution is even simpler than that. Not only should 
the =
university not sign any agreement with Elsevier over what it may or may =
not require its researchers do, but the university should not worry too =
much about embargoes; it should simply implement the "Almost OA" =
email-eprint-request Button.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > That way not only will the university's immediate-deposit 
mandate =
(with the help of the HEFCE/REF immediate-deposit mandate) ensure that =
all final drafts are immediately deposited and that at least 60% of =
those immediate-deposits (including all Elsevier deposits!) will be made =
immediately OA. But, in addition, even the those immediate-deposits that =
are from from the 40% of journals -- which (unlike Springer and Elsevier =
and APS and IOP and all the other publishers who are on the Side if the =
angels) try to embargo OA -- will be made "Almost OA", via the 
Button.=20=

>>> >=20
>>> > And with the help of the eprint Button, the ID/OA mandate 
will go =
on to make OA embargoes as ineffectual as Clause 2, once the =
immediate-deposit mandate becomes universal.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > And a word about "systematicity": Systematically 
duplicating the =
contents of a journal would mean duplicating all of its contents. But a =
single institution just provides a tiny (and unsystematic) fraction of =
any journal's contents.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Globally mandated OA will be another story: But Elsevier 
cannot =
hope to persuade all universities worldwide to desist from mandating OA! =
(And it is noteworthy that Elsevier is not even trying to get research =
funders to sign "agreements" not mandate OA, or to extend OA 
embargoes; =
Elsevier's strategy there is lobbying, since they don't have the =
subscription discount carrot with which it lures naive universities into =
signing over their mandating rights in exchange for a better =
subscription Big-Deal.=20
>>> >=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > However, if Alicia is indicating this new stance is a move 
away =
from that which I was told by Elsevier earlier today, and is still less =
than clearly indicated on their web pages (which indicate an author can =
comply by self-archiving, but then go on to list embargo periods which =
do not meet RCUK policy) then that is great news.=20
>>> >
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Alicia is just re-stating the Clause 1. Take her at her 
word.=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Best wishes,=20
>>> >=20
>>> > Stevan  =20
>>> >=20
>>> > =20
>>>=20
>>> >=20
>>> > On 1 May 2013, at 14:49, "Stevan Harnad" 
<amsciforum AT gmail.com> =
wrote:=20
>>> >=20
>>> >
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> >=20
>>>> > Alicia Wise  AT wisealic20h=20
>>>> >  AT AmSciForum Stevan - Elsevier's #oa agreement with 
RCUK, =
including gold & green options, is described here: =
http://www.elsevier.com/about/publishing-guidelines/policies/funding-body-=
agreements/research-councils-uk =85=20
>>>> >=20
>>>> > Stevan Harnad  AT AmSciForum8h=20
>>>> >  AT wisealic Simple Question: Is/isn't Elsevier-like 
Springer-still =
Green on immediate, unembargoed #oa self-archiving?  http://j.mp/11B5gcg =
=20
>>>> >=20
>>>> > Alicia Wise  AT wisealic19m=20
>>>> >  AT AmSciForum yes, Elsevier endorses immediate 
self-archiving of =
accepted final drafts free for all on the web immediately upon =
acceptance.=20
>>>> >=20
>>>> > Stevan Harnad  AT AmSciForum3m=20
>>>> >  AT wisealic Thanks Alicia. Then Elsevier remains on Side 
of the =
Angels & I will continue to attest to that!
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> =
--------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------=20
>>> Andras Holl / Holl Andras                 e-mail: holl AT 
konkoly.hu=20
>>> Konkoly Observatory / MTA CsFK CsI       Tel.: +36 1 3919368 Fax: 
=
+36 1 2754668=20
>>> IT manager / Szamitastechn. rendszervez. Mail: H1525 POBox 67, =
Budapest, Hungary=20
>>> =
--------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------=20
>>>=20
>>> <ATT00001..txt>
>>=20
>>=20
>> --     =20
>> To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
>> http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f
>=20
> <ATT00001..txt>


--Apple-Mail-20-580530814
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=windows-1252

<html><head></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: 
break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
"><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div 
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
"><div>Since -- exactly like Springer's (hedge-free) 
rights-retention =
policy (and countless others) -- Elsevier's policy does indeed formally =
recognize right of the authors of the articles published in 2000 =
Elsevier journals to make them immediately OA (unembargoed), I would say =
that the "angelic" tag was fully =
earned.</div></div></blockquote><div><div 
style=3D"word-wrap: =
break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: =
after-white-space; 
"><div><br></div><div>Actually, they don't. =
&nbsp;See:</div><div><br></div><div><a =
href=3D"http://www.elsevier.com/authors/author-rights-and-responsibilities=
">http://www.elsevier.com/authors/author-rights-and-responsibilities</a></=
div><div><br></div><div>Penultimate row of the =
column:</div><div><br></div><div><b>'<span class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; =
line-height: 18px; ">Mandated deposit or deposit in or posting to =
subject-oriented or centralized 
repositories'</span></b></div><div><font =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"Helvetica, 
sans-serif"><span =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"line-height: =
18px;"><b><br></b></span></font></div><div><font =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"Helvetica, 
sans-serif"><span =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"line-height: 
18px;">for 'accepted =
author manuscripts'<b> '</b></span></font><span 
class=3D"Apple-style-span"=
 style=3D"font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; =
line-height: 18px; ">Yes under specific agreement between Elsevier and 
=
the repository**'</span></div><div><span 
class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; =
line-height: 18px; 
"><br></span></div><div><span =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-family: Helvetica, 
sans-serif; =
font-size: 12px; line-height: 18px; ">To me that means 'no' if no =
agreement between Elsevier and the repository. &nbsp;The exception is =
arXiv where Elsevier obviously feel the horse has bolted and there is no =
point trying to close that stable 
door.&nbsp;</span></div><div><span =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-family: Helvetica, 
sans-serif; =
font-size: 12px; line-height: 18px; 
"><br></span></div><div><span =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-family: Helvetica, 
sans-serif; =
font-size: 12px; line-height: 18px; 
">David</span></div><div><span =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-family: Helvetica, 
sans-serif; =
font-size: 12px; line-height: 18px; 
"><br></span></div></div></div><div>
<div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span 
class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: =
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; =
text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; =
white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div =
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span 
class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: =
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; =
text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; =
white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div =
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span 
class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: =
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; =
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; =
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div =
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span 
class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: =
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; =
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; =
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div =
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span 
class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: =
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; =
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; =
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div =
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span 
class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: =
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; =
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; =
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div =
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span 
class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: =
normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; =
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; =
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div =
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br></div><div 
=
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
"><br></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></d=
iv></span></div></span></div>
</div>
<br><div><div>On 3 May 2013, at 12:25, Stevan Harnad 
wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote 
type=3D"cite"><meta =
http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
"><div><div>On 2013-05-03, at 2:57 AM, David Prosser 
&lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:david.prosser AT rluk.ac.uk">david.prosser AT 
rluk.ac.uk</a>&gt; =
wrote:</div><br 
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; 
-webkit-nbsp-mode: =
space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">I agree with Andras and 
=
I cannot see how any publisher who has a policy along the lines =
of:<div><br></div><blockquote 
class=3D"webkit-indent-blockquote" =
style=3D"margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">You may 
make =
your author version freely available without embargo unless you are =
mandated (by funder or institution) to do so, in which case you may not =
make your author version freely available without =
embargo</blockquote><div><br></div><div>can be 
described as being on the =
side of the Angels. &nbsp;We may dismiss such a policy as FUD or even =
claim that it is illogical and unenforceable - as Stevan does - but we =
cannot possibly describe it as =
angelic.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Since -- exactly like =
Springer's (hedge-free) rights-retention policy (and countless others) =
-- Elsevier's policy does indeed formally recognize right of the authors =
of the articles published in 2000 Elsevier journals to make them =
immediately OA (unembargoed), I would say that the "angelic" tag was 
=
fully earned.</div><div><br></div><div>The tag is 
not earned for the =
FUD. The right right response to the FUD is to ignore =
it.</div><div><br></div><div>Let's not waste time 
and divert attention =
to the question of whether they are Cherubim or Seraphim: The fact that =
Elsevier give their Green Light to immediate, unembargoed OA-provision =
by their authors is what matters (to those who care more about OA than =
about journal pricing or publisher =
boycotting).</div><div><br></div><div>Harrumph!</div><div><br></div><div>S=
tevan</div><div><br><blockquote 
type=3D"cite"><div style=3D"word-wrap: =
break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: =
after-white-space; "><div><div><div>On 2 May 2013, at 
08:17, Andras Holl =
wrote:</div><br 
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite">

<meta content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8" 
http-equiv=3D"Content-Type">
<meta content=3D"OPENWEBMAIL" name=3D"GENERATOR">

<div bgcolor=3D"#ffffff">

<br>Dear Stevan,
<br>
<br>Regardless however right you are, Elsevier's play with words =
succesfully confuses
<br>a large number of authors, who do not deposit because of this.
<br>
<br>Andras
<br>
<br><font size=3D"2"><b>On Wed, 1 May 2013 20:24:46 
-0400, Stevan Harnad =
wrote</b>
<br>&gt; On Wed,=20
May 1, 2013 at 5:10 PM, BISSET J. <span 
dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a =
target=3D"_blank" =
href=3D"mailto:james.bisset AT durham.ac.uk">james.bisset AT 
durham.ac.uk</a>&gt=
;</span> wrote:
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20
&nbsp;<blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left: 
1px =
solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;" 
class=3D"gmail_quote">
<br>&gt;=20

<br>&gt; =46rom our understanding of Elsevier policy this is not the 
=
case in two=20
instances:

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; 1) if the institution requires deposit in their 
institutional=20=

repository

<br>&gt; 2) if the funder requires open access.</blockquote>
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20
Dear James,
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Elsevier rights agreements state that authors=20
retains the right to make their final drafts OA immediately upon =
publication: no=20
embargo.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; I will answer your more detailed questions below, but let 
me=20
already give you a simple general answer from which all the specific =
ones can be=20
deduced.
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; If a contract says <i>you have&nbsp;the right to 
do X</i>,=20
then it cannot go on to stipulate that you only have the "<i>right 
to=20
exercise"</i>&nbsp;your right to do X if you are not required to 
=
exercise it.=20
That is <a =
href=3D"http://www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3Dharnad%20OR%=
20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&amp;=
ie=3DUTF-8&amp;tbm=3Dblg&amp;tbs=3Dqdr:m&amp;num=3D100&amp;c2coff=3D1&amp;=
safe=3Dactive#q=3Delsevier+double-talk+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.o=
rg/&amp;lr=3D&amp;c2coff=3D1&amp;safe=3Dactive&amp;hl=3Den&amp;tbm=3Dblg&a=
mp;tbas=3D0&amp;source=3Dlnt&amp;sa=3DX&amp;ei=3DVpiBUeBI08fSAc-pgaAM&amp;=
ved=3D0CBsQpwUoAA&amp;bav=3Don.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&amp;bvm=3Dbv.45921128,d.dmQ=
&amp;fp=3D1dc003e2610cd254&amp;biw=3D1181&amp;bih=3D708">empty=20
double-talk,</a> and&nbsp;can and should be completely ignored as =
empty.&nbsp;A right is=20
a right; you either have it or you=20
don't.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Moreover, Elsevier authors do not need Elsevier's=20
permission to <i>deposit</i> in their IRs any more than they need =
Elsevier's=20
permission to go to the WC!&nbsp;
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; The only thing at issue is <i>the=20
right to make the deposit immediately OA (i.e., free online)</i>. And =
Elsevier=20
(like Springer, and about 60% of all publishers) state that the author =
retains=20
the right to make the final draft OA immediately upon publication: no OA=20=

embargo.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; So all authors with any sense should go ahead and 
exercise=20
that formally endorsed right that they retain!
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; <blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; 
border-left: =
1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;" 
class=3D"gmail_quote">

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; I have an email from Elsevier today confirming that in 
either=20=

of the two cases above, immediate deposit is permitted but open access =
is not=20
permitted until [after] an embargo period...
<br>&gt; </blockquote>
<br>&gt;=20

<br>&gt; Elsevier is just playing on words here. As I said, the right 
to=20=

<i>deposit</i> is not at issue. Elsevier does not have any say over 
=
where I put=20
my final draft.&nbsp;
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; The only right at issue is&nbsp;<i>the right to=20
make the deposit immediately OA (i.e., free online)</i>.
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20
<blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid 
=
rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;" 
class=3D"gmail_quote">
<br>&gt;=20

<br>&gt; Additionally, Durham has reissued its mandate for =
self-archiving,=20
including a requirement that only those deposited (not necessarily open =
access)=20
can be used for consideration in promotion or probation (the 'how' this=20=

will work us still being looked=20
at
 - So this has not yet been registered anywhere).
<br>&gt; </blockquote>
<br>&gt;=20

<br>&gt; Bravo on adopting the optimal institutional OA mandate. Soon 
we =
can=20
hope that the Durham mandate will be reinforced by the very same mandate =
from <a =
href=3D"http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/rinfrastruct/openaccess/">HE=
FCE/REF</a>:=20
only articles whose final drafts were deposited in the author's=20
institutional repository immediately upon acceptance for publication =
will be=20
eligible for submission to the next REF=20
(2020).

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Institutional and HEFCE immediate-deposit mandates can 
then=20
mutually reinforce one another, and institutions will be able to devise =
a <a =
href=3D"http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1004-Harnad-Foll=
ow-Up-Comments-to-BIS-Select-Committee-on-Open-Access.html">simple=20
mechanism for monitoring and verifying=20
compliance</a>.

<br>&gt; &nbsp;<blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 
0.8ex; =
border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;" =
class=3D"gmail_quote">
<br>&gt;=20

<br>&gt; Because we now mandate deposit, Elsevier have indicated we =
cannot make=20
any publications open access until we sign an agreement with them - =
which=20
includes restricting access from immediate upon publication (as it was =
without a=20
mandate) to the embargo=20
periods
 mentioned above.
<br>&gt; </blockquote>
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; This is very=20
interesting: Have you asked yourself <i>why</i> Elsevier is asking 
for a =
second=20
agreement? Isn't the author's signed agreement enough, if it is really=20=

sufficient to accord him a right yet prevent him from exercising that=20
right?

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Well obviously not, because of the double-talk I just=20
mentioned. In an agreement with the clause
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; <blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; 
border: medium =
none; padding: 0px;">

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; <b>Clause C1:</b>&nbsp;"<i>You 
retain the right to do=20
X</i>"&nbsp;</blockquote>
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; followed by the clause&nbsp;
<br>&gt;=20

<br>&gt; <blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; 
border: medium =
none; padding: 0px;">
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20

<b>Clause C2:&nbsp;</b>"<i>but you may not 
"exercise your right" to=20
do X if you are required to do X</i>"</blockquote>
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; you are=20
sanctioning a contradiction. Logically speaking (and contracts must obey =
logic=20
as surely as they must obey the law), this is pretty much the same as =
simply=20
saying:
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20

<blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: medium none; =
padding: 0px;">
<br>&gt;=20

<br>&gt; <b>Clause C1:</b>&nbsp;"<i>You 
may do=20
X</i>"&nbsp;</blockquote>

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; and
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; <blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; 
border: medium =
none; padding: 0px;">
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; <b>Clause C2:&nbsp;</b>"<i>You=20
may not do X</i>."</blockquote>
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; With a logical=20
contradiction, you can pretty much take your choice and do whatever you =
like,=20
because anything (and the opposite of anything) follows from a=20
contradiction.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; A good choice would be to read sequentially, follow Clause 
1,=20=

and simply ignore Clause 2, which just says the opposite. If challenged, =
cite=20
clause 1.
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; And this is the real reason that Elsevier is not=20
comfortable with relying on its signed author rights agreement with its =
authors=20
as grounds for restraining them form doing what the retain the right to =
do if=20
they are required to do it. So they instead try to get a signature to =
yet=20
another agreement, from yet another party -- the university -- a further=20=

agreement tjat would have the (failed) intended effect of the author =
rights=20
agreement: <i>The institution must sign that it may not require the =
author to=20
exercise his right to provide immediate=20
OA.</i>

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Solution? Simple: The university should not sign!&nbsp;
<br>&gt;=20

<br>&gt; If Elsevier really thinks its author agreement has already 
seen =
to it=20
that mandated authors may not provide immediate OA if required by his=20
university, then there is no call for the university to sign a=20
thing.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Of course, this is not quite the way Elsevier goes about=20
trying to get the university to sign: It proposes a contingency, in =
confidential=20
pricing negotiations, between the subscription deal it offers the =
university,=20
and whether or not they require immediate=20
OA.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; This would be unethical if it weren't so=20
ludicrous.
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Of course the university should not sign away its=20
right to mandate immediate-deposit because of a subscription-deal=20
contingency.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; But the solution is even simpler than that. Not only 
should=20
the university not sign any agreement with Elsevier over what it may or =
may not=20
require its researchers do, but the university should not worry too much =
about=20
embargoes; it should simply implement the "Almost OA" <a =
href=3D"http://www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3Dharnad%20OR%=
20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&amp;=
ie=3DUTF-8&amp;tbm=3Dblg&amp;tbs=3Dqdr:m&amp;num=3D100&amp;c2coff=3D1&amp;=
safe=3Dactive#q=3DButton+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&amp;hl=3De=
n&amp;lr=3D&amp;c2coff=3D1&amp;safe=3Dactive&amp;tbm=3Dblg&amp;tbas=3D0&am=
p;source=3Dlnt&amp;sa=3DX&amp;ei=3DHnU5UcDCFIyq0AGWhIHQAw&amp;ved=3D0CBwQp=
wUoAA&amp;fp=3D1&amp;biw=3D1288&amp;bih=3D758&amp;bav=3Don.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.=
&amp;cad=3Db&amp;sei=3D5KGBUb2GD6Pm0gGa24HoDw">email-eprint-request=20
Button</a>.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; That way not only will the university's immediate-deposit=20
mandate (with the help of the HEFCE/REF immediate-deposit mandate) =
ensure that=20
all final drafts are immediately deposited and that at least 60% of =
those=20
immediate-deposits (including all Elsevier deposits!) will be made =
immediately=20
OA. But, in addition, even the those immediate-deposits that are from =
from the=20
40% of journals -- which (unlike Springer and Elsevier and APS and IOP =
and all=20
the other publishers who are on the Side if the angels) try to embargo =
OA --=20
will be made "Almost OA", via the=20
Button.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; And with the help of the eprint Button, the ID/OA mandate 
will=20=

go on to make OA embargoes as ineffectual as Clause 2, once the=20
immediate-deposit mandate becomes universal.
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; And a word about=20
"systematicity": Systematically duplicating the contents of a 
journal=20
would mean duplicating all of its contents. But a single institution =
just=20
provides a tiny (and unsystematic) fraction of any journal's=20
contents.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Globally mandated OA will be another story: But Elsevier=20
cannot hope to persuade all universities worldwide to desist from =
mandating OA!=20
(And it is noteworthy that Elsevier is not even trying to get research =
funders=20
to sign "agreements" not mandate OA, or to extend OA embargoes;=20
Elsevier's strategy there is lobbying, since they don't have the=20
subscription discount carrot with which it lures naive universities into =
signing=20
over their mandating rights in exchange for a better subscription=20
Big-Deal.

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; <blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; 
border-left: =
1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;" 
class=3D"gmail_quote">
<br>&gt;=20

<br>&gt; However, if Alicia is indicating this new stance is a move 
away =
from=20
that which I was told by Elsevier earlier today, and is still less than =
clearly=20
indicated on their web pages (which indicate an author can comply by=20
self-archiving, but then go on=20
to
 list embargo periods which do not meet RCUK policy) then that is great=20=

news.
<br>&gt; </blockquote>
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Alicia is just re-stating the=20
Clause 1. Take her at her word.
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; Best wishes,
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20
Stevan &nbsp;
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; &nbsp;<blockquote style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 
0.8ex; =
border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;" =
class=3D"gmail_quote">

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20

On 1 May 2013, at 14:49, "Stevan Harnad" &lt;<a 
target=3D"_blank" =
href=3D"mailto:amsciforum AT gmail.com">amsciforum AT 
gmail.com</a>&gt;=20
wrote:
<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20

<blockquote type=3D"cite">

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt;=20

<a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: rgb(153, 153, 153); =
text-decoration: none;" 
href=3D"https://twitter.com/wisealic"><strong =
style=3D"color: rgb(51, 51, 51);">Alicia 
Wise</strong>&nbsp;<span =
style=3D"font-size: 12px; direction: ltr;"><s 
style=3D"text-decoration: =
none; color: rgb(187, 187, 187);"> AT 
</s><b>wisealic</b></span></a><small =
style=3D"font-size: 12px; color: rgb(187, 187, 187); float: right; =
margin-top: 1px;"><a target=3D"_blank" 
style=3D"color: rgb(153, 153, =
153); text-decoration: none;" title=3D"12:35 PM -=20
30 Apr 13" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/wisealic/status/329287890641252352">20h</a></s=
mall>

<br>&gt;=20

<a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); 
text-decoration: =
none;" dir=3D"ltr" 
href=3D"https://twitter.com/AmSciForum"><s =
style=3D"text-decoration: none; color: rgb(128, 226, =
147);"> AT </s><b>AmSciForum</b></a>=20
Stevan -=20
Elsevier's
<a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); 
text-decoration: =
none;" dir=3D"ltr" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/search?q=3D%23oa&amp;src=3Dhash">
<s style=3D"text-decoration: none; color: rgb(128, 226, =
147);">#</s><b>oa</b></a>=20
agreement with RCUK, including gold &amp; green options, is described =
here:<a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); =
text-decoration: none;" rel=3D"nofollow" dir=3D"ltr" =
title=3D"http://www.elsevier.com/about/publishing-guidelines/policies/fund=
ing-body-agreements/research-councils-uk" =
href=3D"http://t.co/s8faOyHfEE"><span style=3D"color: 
rgb(44, 207, 76); =
text-decoration: none; font-size: 0px; line-height: 0;">
http://www.</span><span style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); =
text-decoration: 
none;">elsevier.com/about/publishi</span><span =
style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); text-decoration: none; font-size: 0px; =
line-height: =
0;">ng-guidelines/policies/funding-body-agreements/research-councils-uk</s=
pan><span style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); text-decoration: =
none;"><span style=3D"font-size: 0px; line-height: =
0;">&nbsp;</span>=85</span></a>

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; <a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: 
rgb(153, 153, 153); =
text-decoration: none;" 
href=3D"https://twitter.com/AmSciForum"><strong =
style=3D"color: rgb(51, 51, 51);">Stevan 
Harnad</strong>&nbsp;<span =
style=3D"font-size: 12px; direction: ltr;"><s 
style=3D"text-decoration: =
none; color: rgb(187, 187, =
187);"> AT 
</s><b>AmSciForum</b></span></a><small 
style=3D"font-size: 12px; =
color: rgb(187, 187, 187); float: right; margin-top: 1px;"><a =
target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: rgb(153, 153, 153); 
text-decoration: =
none;" title=3D"11:50 PM=20
- 30 Apr 13" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/AmSciForum/status/329457762482397185">8h</a></=
small>

<br>&gt; <a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: 
rgb(44, 207, 76); =
text-decoration: none;" dir=3D"ltr" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/wisealic"><s 
style=3D"text-decoration: none; =
color: rgb(128, 226, 147);"> AT 
</s><b>wisealic</b></a>=20
Simple=20
Question:
 Is/isn't Elsevier-like Springer-still Green on immediate, unembargoed =
<a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); 
text-decoration: =
none;" dir=3D"ltr" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/search?q=3D%23oa&amp;src=3Dhash">
<s style=3D"text-decoration: none; color: rgb(128, 226, =
147);">#</s><b>oa</b></a>=20
self-archiving?
<a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); 
text-decoration: =
none;" rel=3D"nofollow" dir=3D"ltr" 
title=3D"http://j.mp/11B5gcg" =
href=3D"http://t.co/Jd0DTucqng">&nbsp;<span 
style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, =
76); text-decoration: none; font-size: 0px; line-height: =
0;">http://</span><span style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); 
=
text-decoration: none;">j.mp/11B5gcg</span><font 
color=3D"#2ccf4c"><span =
style=3D"font-size: 0px; line-height: 
0;"></span></font><span =
style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); text-decoration: none;"><span 
=
style=3D"font-size: 0px; line-height: 
0;">&nbsp;</span></span></a>

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; <a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: 
rgb(153, 153, 153); =
text-decoration: none;" 
href=3D"https://twitter.com/wisealic"><strong =
style=3D"color: rgb(51, 51, 51);">Alicia 
Wise</strong>&nbsp;<span =
style=3D"font-size: 12px; direction: ltr;"><s 
style=3D"text-decoration: =
none; color: rgb(187, 187, 187);"> AT 
</s><b>wisealic</b></span></a><small =
style=3D"font-size: 12px; color: rgb(187, 187, 187); float: right; =
margin-top: 1px;"><a target=3D"_blank" 
style=3D"color: rgb(153, 153, =
153); text-decoration: none;" title=3D"8:27 AM - 1=20
May 13" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/wisealic/status/329587843716509696">19m</a></s=
mall>

<br>&gt; <a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: 
rgb(44, 207, 76); =
text-decoration: none;" dir=3D"ltr" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/AmSciForum"><s 
style=3D"text-decoration: =
none; color: rgb(128, 226, 147);"> AT 
</s><b>AmSciForum</b></a>=20
<b>yes,=20
Elsevier
 endorses immediate self-archiving of accepted final drafts free for all =
on the=20
web immediately upon=20
acceptance.</b>

<br>&gt;=20
<br>&gt; <a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: 
rgb(153, 153, 153); =
text-decoration: none;" 
href=3D"https://twitter.com/AmSciForum"><strong =
style=3D"color: rgb(51, 51, 51);">Stevan 
Harnad</strong>&nbsp;<span =
style=3D"font-size: 12px; direction: ltr;"><s 
style=3D"text-decoration: =
none; color: rgb(187, 187, =
187);"> AT 
</s><b>AmSciForum</b></span></a><small 
style=3D"font-size: 12px; =
color: rgb(187, 187, 187); float: right; margin-top: 1px;"><a =
target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: rgb(153, 153, 153); 
text-decoration: =
none;" title=3D"8:43 AM -=20
1 May 13" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/AmSciForum/status/329591992843640833">3m</a></=
small>

<br>&gt; <a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: 
rgb(44, 207, 76); =
text-decoration: none;" dir=3D"ltr" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/wisealic"><s 
style=3D"text-decoration: none; =
color: rgb(128, 226, 147);"> AT 
</s><b>wisealic</b></a>
 Thanks Alicia. Then Elsevier remains on Side of the Angels &amp; I 
will=20=

continue to attest to=20
that!
<a target=3D"_blank" style=3D"color: rgb(44, 207, 76); 
text-decoration: =
none;" dir=3D"ltr" =
href=3D"https://twitter.com/search?q=3D%23oa&amp;src=3Dhash">
</a></blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
<br>
=
<br>----------------------------------------------------------------------=
----------=20

<br>
Andras Holl / Holl Andras &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 
&nbsp; &nbsp; =
&nbsp; &nbsp;
e-mail: <a href=3D"mailto:holl AT konkoly.hu">holl AT 
konkoly.hu</a>=20

<br>
Konkoly Observatory / MTA CsFK CsI &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Tel.: +36 1 
=
3919368 Fax:=20
+36 1 2754668=20

<br>
IT manager / Szamitastechn. rendszervez. Mail: H1525 POBox 67, Budapest, =
Hungary=20

<br>
=
--------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------=20

<br>

<br>
</font>

</div>


=
<span>&lt;ATT00001..txt&gt;</span></blockquote></div><br></div></div><br>-=
- &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br>To unsubscribe 
from the BOAI Forum, =
use the form on this page:<br><a =
href=3D"http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f">http://www.soros.or=
g/openaccess/forum.shtml?f</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div><span>&lt;A=
TT00001..txt&gt;</span></blockquote></div><br></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail-20-580530814--

        
--      
To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f


[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [prev] [next] [options] [help]

 E-mail:  openaccess@soros.org .