Budapest Open Access Initiative      

Budapest Open Access Initiative: BOAI Forum Archive

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

boaiforum messages

[BOAI] Re: More Finch Fallout: "The Royal Society welcomes leading institutions to its Open Access Membership Programme"

From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum AT gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 19:33:59 -0400


Threading: [BOAI] More Finch Fallout: "The Royal Society welcomes leading institutions to its Open Access Membership Programme" from amsciforum AT gmail.com
      • This Message

--089e01175f8306232d04e1d1a5ab
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The following posting from Marc Couture spells out very explicitly the two
ways in which the new RS policy on Green OA can  be interpreted. (This, for
those who missed the subtlety, is precisely why I wrote "perhaps" in: 
"But
now -- perhaps -- the RS seems to have adopted a 12-month embargo on Green
OA...")

*RE: *On 2013-07-18, at 7:39 AM, Marianne Haska <
> marianne.haska AT royalsociety.org> wrote:

Replies below from a much objective Graham Triggs to Stephen Harnad

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Couture Marc <marc.couture AT teluq.ca>
Date: Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:01 AM
Subject: [GOAL] Re: [sparc-oaforum] Re: More Finch Fallout: "The Royal
Society welcomes leading institutions to its Open Access Membership
Programme"
To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal AT 
eprints.org>

A =93much objective=94 Graham Triggs (says Marianne Haska from the Royal
Society) wrote:

=93According to that resource [probably talking of
http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/licence.xhtml] they [RS]
have exactly the same policy that covers loading / depositing the postprint
to any online resource - personal website, institutional website ore
repository. The only distinction they make is that you can use the
postprint internally, or email to colleagues without embargo. All online /
systematic distribution is limited by the embargo period.=94

I=92m sorry, and at the risk of being considered not so =93much objective=
=94 by
certain parties involved, I found that Triggs=92 description of the
permissions applying to postprints is only one possible interpretation of
the terms of the licence.

If I simply reformat the relevant part of the licence, without changing a
word, it reads:

=93You are free to:

- post [the author generated postprint] on Your (personal OR institutional)
web site;

AND

- load it onto an (institutional OR not for profit) repository no earlier
than 12 months from the date of first publication...=94

According to this formatting, one concludes that the embargo applies to
repositories but not to websites, which raises exactly the inconsistency
Harnad points out.

As a general rule, when I=92m faced with two possible, equally valid
interpretations of the terms of a licence, I feel perfectly at ease to
choose the one that suits me best. In this case, as long as the text of the
license remains what it is now, I wouldn=92t hesitate to post a postprint o=
n
any website hosted by my university at (or before) the date of publication.

As to Harnad=92s argument that an institution=92s repository is a (personal=
 or
institutional) website by another name, I think it applies where there is a
functional integration of these websites and the institutional repository.
This is the case in Southampton, as Harnad mentions, but also, as I found
out, at Li=E8ge, where a hyperlink to the faculty member=92s papers in the
repository seems to appear automatically in faculty home pages (see, for
instance, 
https://my.ulg.ac.be/MyULg/TR_xt/trombi.do?mode=3Dview&key=3DU030=
247).

This is in fact one of the arguments used to convince researchers to
deposit their papers in the institution=92s repository: no more need to
maintain a publication list on one=92s website or home page, as it=92s
automatically taken in charge by the repository software.

Marc Couture

--089e01175f8306232d04e1d1a5ab
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div 
style=3D"word-wrap:break-word"><div>The=
 following posting from Marc Couture spells out very explicitly the two way=
s in which the new RS policy on Green OA can =A0be interpreted. (This, for =
those who missed the subtlety, is precisely why I wrote 
&quot;perhaps&quot;=
 in: &quot;<span style=3D"font-family:Helvetica">But now -- 
perhaps -- the =
RS seems to have adopted a 12-month embargo on Green 
OA...&quot;)</span></d=
iv>
</div></blockquote><blockquote 
type=3D"cite"><div style=3D"word-wrap:break-=
word"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" 
style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;b=
order-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:s=
olid;padding-left:1ex">
<b>RE: </b>On 2013-07-18, at 7:39 AM, Marianne Haska &lt;<a 
href=3D"mailto:=
marianne.haska AT royalsociety.org">marianne.haska AT 
royalsociety.org</a>&gt; wr=
ote:=A0=A0</blockquote><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" 
style=3D"margin:0p=
x 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);bo=
rder-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<font color=3D"#990000" 
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica">Replies below from =
a much objective Graham Triggs</font><span 
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica">=
=A0</span><span style=3D"font-family:Helvetica">to 
Stephen Harnad</span></b=
lockquote>
</div></blockquote></div>---------- Forwarded message 
----------<br><div cl=
ass=3D"gmail_quote">From: <b 
class=3D"gmail_sendername">Couture Marc</b> <s=
pan dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:marc.couture AT 
teluq.ca">marc.couture AT t=
eluq.ca</a>&gt;</span><br>
Date: Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:01 AM<br>Subject: [GOAL] Re: 
[sparc-oaforum] =
Re: More Finch Fallout: &quot;The Royal Society welcomes leading 
institutio=
ns to its Open Access Membership Programme&quot;<br>To: 
&quot;Global Open A=
ccess List (Successor of AmSci)&quot; &lt;<a 
href=3D"mailto:goal AT eprints.or=
g">goal AT eprints.org</a>&gt;<br>
<br>A =93much objective=94 Graham Triggs (says Marianne Haska from the 
Roya=
l Society) wrote:<br>
<br>
=93According to that resource [probably talking of <a 
href=3D"http://royals=
ocietypublishing.org/site/authors/licence.xhtml" 
target=3D"_blank">http://r=
oyalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/licence.xhtml</a>] they [RS] have 
ex=
actly the same policy that covers loading / depositing the postprint to any=
 online resource - personal website, institutional website ore repository. =
The only distinction they make is that you can use the postprint internally=
, or email to colleagues without embargo. All online / systematic distribut=
ion is limited by the embargo period.=94<br>

<br>
I=92m sorry, and at the risk of being considered not so =93much objective=
=94 by certain parties involved, I found that Triggs=92 description of the =
permissions applying to postprints is only one possible interpretation of t=
he terms of the licence.<br>

<br>
If I simply reformat the relevant part of the licence, without changing a w=
ord, it reads:<br>
<br>
=93You are free to:<br>
<br>
- post [the author generated postprint] on Your (personal OR institutional)=
 web site;<br>
<br>
AND<br>
<br>
- load it onto an (institutional OR not for profit) repository no earlier t=
han 12 months from the date of first publication...=94<br>
<br>
According to this formatting, one concludes that the embargo applies to rep=
ositories but not to websites, which raises exactly the inconsistency Harna=
d points out.<br>
<br>
As a general rule, when I=92m faced with two possible, equally valid interp=
retations of the terms of a licence, I feel perfectly at ease to choose the=
 one that suits me best. In this case, as long as the text of the license r=
emains what it is now, I wouldn=92t hesitate to post a postprint on any web=
site hosted by my university at (or before) the date of publication.<br>

<br>
As to Harnad=92s argument that an institution=92s repository is a (personal=
 or institutional) website by another name, I think it applies where there =
is a functional integration of these websites and the institutional reposit=
ory. This is the case in Southampton, as Harnad mentions, but also, as I fo=
und out, at Li=E8ge, where a hyperlink to the faculty member=92s papers in =
the repository seems to appear automatically in faculty home pages (see, fo=
r instance, <a 
href=3D"https://my.ulg.ac.be/MyULg/TR_xt/trombi.do?mode=3Dvi=
ew&amp;key=3DU030247" 
target=3D"_blank">https://my.ulg.ac.be/MyULg/TR_xt/tr=
ombi.do?mode=3Dview&amp;key=3DU030247</a>).<br>

<br>
This is in fact one of the arguments used to convince researchers to deposi=
t their papers in the institution=92s repository: no more need to maintain =
a publication list on one=92s website or home page, as it=92s automatically=
 taken in charge by the repository software.<br>

<br>
Marc Couture<br>
<br><br></div>

--089e01175f8306232d04e1d1a5ab--

        
--      
To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/boai-forum

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

 E-mail:  openaccess@soros.org .