Budapest Open Access Initiative      

Budapest Open Access Initiative: BOAI Forum Archive

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

boaiforum messages

[BOAI] 1st-Party Give-Aways vs. 3rd-Party Rip-Offs

From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum AT gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 10:37:29 -0400


Threading:      • This Message
             [BOAI] Re: 1st-Party Give-Aways vs. 3rd-Party Rip-Offs from amsciforum AT gmail.com

--047d7b33daf22636f204e35c7b0c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

If supplying eprints to requesters could be delegated to 3rd parties like
Repository 
Managers<https://theconversation.com/neuroscientists-need-to-embrace-open-access-publishing-too-16736#comment_198916>
to
perform automatically, then they would become violations of copyright
contracts.

What makes the eprint-request
Button<https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/RequestCopy> legal
is the fact that it is the *author* who decides, in each individual
instance, whether or not to comply with an individual eprint request for
his own work; *it does not happen automatically*.

Think about it: If it were just the fact of requesters having to do two
keystrokes for access instead of just one (OA), then the compliance
keystroke might as well have been done by software rather than the
Repository Manager! And that would certainly not be compliance with a
publisher OA embargo. "Almost OA" would just become 2-stroke OA.

No. What makes the eprint-request
Button<https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/RequestCopy> both
legal and subversive is that it is not 3rd-party
piracy<http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/0671.html>
(by
either a Repository Manager or an automatic computer programme) but 1st-party
provision of individual
copies<http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/262893/1/resolution.html#9.1>,
to individual requesters, for research purposes, by the author, in each
individual instance: the latter alone continues the long accepted tradition
of reprint-provision by scholars and scientists to their own work.

If reprint-request cards had been mailed instead to 3rd-parties who simply
photocopied anyone's articles and mailed them to requesters (with or
without a fee) the practice would have been attacked in the courts by
publishers as piracy long ago.

*The best way to undermine the Button as a remedy against publisher OA
mandates, and to empower the publishing lobby to block it, would be to
conflate it with 2-stroke 3rd-party OA!*

That practice should never be recommended.

Rather, make crystal clear the fundamental difference between 1st-party
give-away and 3rd-party rip-off.


[Parenthetically: Of course it is true that all these legal and technical
distinctions are trivial nonsense! It is an ineluctable fact that the
online PostGutenberg medium has made technically and economically possible
and easily feasible what was technically and economically impossible in the
Gutenberg medium: *to make all refereed research articles* -- each, without
exception, an author give-away, written purely for research impact rather
than royalty income -- *immediately accessible to all would-be users*, not
just to subscribers: OA. That outcome is both optimal and inevitable for
research; researchers; their institutions; their funders; the R&D industry;
students; teachers; journalists; the developing world; access-denied
scholars and scientists; the general public; research uptake, productivity,
impact and progress; and the tax-payers who fund the research. *The only
parties with whose interests that optimal outcome is in conflict are the
refereed-research publishers* who had been providing an essential service
to research in the Gutenberg era. It is that publishing "tail" that 
is now
trying to wag the research "dog," to deter and delay what is optimal 
and
inevitable for research for as long as possible, by invoking Gutenberg-era
pseudo-legal pseudo-technicalities to try to embargo OA, by holding it
hostage to their accustomed revenue streams and *modus operandi*. OA
mandates, the immediate-deposit clause, and the eprint-request Button are
the research community's means of mooting these delay tactics and hastening
the natural evolution to the optimal and inevitable outcome in the
PostGutenberg era.]

Sale, A., Couture, M., Rodrigues, E., Carr, L. and Harnad, S. (2012) Open
Access Mandates and the "Fair Dealing"
Button<http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18511/>.
In: *Dynamic Fair Dealing: Creating Canadian Culture
Online<http://www.utppublishing.com/Dynamic-Fair-Dealing-Creating-Canadian-Culture-Online.html>
* (Rosemary J. Coombe & Darren Wershler, Eds.)

--047d7b33daf22636f204e35c7b0c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p style=3D"margin:0px"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verd=
ana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,=
255)">If supplying eprints to requesters could be=A0</span><a 
href=3D"https=
://theconversation.com/neuroscientists-need-to-embrace-open-access-publishi=
ng-too-16736#comment_198916" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102);font-family:verda=
na,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,2=
55)">delegated to 3rd parties like Repository 
Managers</a><span style=3D"co=
lor:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:=
13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0to perform automatically, 
then t=
hey would become violations of copyright contracts.=A0</span><br 
style=3D"c=
olor:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size=
:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><span 
style=3D"color=
:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13p=
x;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">What makes 
the=A0</span><a href=3D"htt=
ps://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/RequestCopy" 
style=3D"font-size:13px=
;color:rgb(0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;backgro=
und-color:rgb(255,255,255)">eprint-request Button</a><span 
style=3D"color:r=
gb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;=
background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0legal is the fact that it is 
the=A0</=
span><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,s=
ans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">author</em><spa=
n 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-ser=
if;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0who decides, in 
eac=
h individual instance, whether or not to comply with an individual eprint r=
equest for his own work;=A0</span><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-fam=
ily:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(=
255,255,255)">it does not happen automatically</em><span 
style=3D"color:rgb=
(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;ba=
ckground-color:rgb(255,255,255)">.=A0</span><br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51=
);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-=
color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><span 
style=3D"color=
:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13p=
x;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">Think about it: If it were just 
the fa=
ct of requesters having to do two keystrokes for access instead of just one=
 (OA), then the compliance keystroke might as well have been done by softwa=
re rather than the Repository Manager! And that would certainly not be comp=
liance with a publisher OA embargo. &quot;Almost OA&quot; would just 
become=
 2-stroke OA.</span><br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,ar=
ial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><span 
style=3D"color=
:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13p=
x;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">No. What makes 
the=A0</span><a href=3D=
"https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/RequestCopy" 
style=3D"color:rgb(=
0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;bac=
kground-color:rgb(255,255,255)">eprint-request Button</a><span 
style=3D"col=
or:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1=
3px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0both legal and subversive is 
that=
=A0</span><a 
href=3D"http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/06=
71.html" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,s=
ans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">it is not 
3rd-p=
arty piracy</a><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial=
,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0=
(by either a Repository Manager or an automatic computer programme) but=A0<=
/span><a 
href=3D"http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/262893/1/resolution.html#9.1" s=
tyle=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;=
font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">1st-party provision 
of in=
dividual copies</a><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,a=
rial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"=
>, to individual requesters, for research purposes, by the author, in each =
individual instance: the latter alone continues the long accepted tradition=
 of reprint-provision by scholars and scientists to their own work.=A0</spa=
n><br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans=
-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><span 
style=3D"color=
:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13p=
x;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">If reprint-request cards had been 
mail=
ed instead to 3rd-parties who simply photocopied anyone&#39;s articles and 
=
mailed them to requesters (with or without a fee) the practice would have b=
een attacked in the courts by publishers as piracy long ago.</span><br 
styl=
e=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;fon=
t-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><em 
style=3D"color:r=
gb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;=
background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">The best way to undermine the Button 
as =
a remedy against publisher OA mandates, and to empower the publishing lobby=
 to block it, would be to conflate it with 2-stroke 3rd-party 
OA!</em><br s=
tyle=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;=
font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><span 
style=3D"color=
:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13p=
x;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">That practice should never be 
recommen=
ded.</span><br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helve=
tica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><span 
style=3D"color=
:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13p=
x;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">Rather, make crystal clear the 
fundame=
ntal difference between 1st-party give-away and 3rd-party 
rip-off.</span></=
p>
<p style=3D"margin:0px"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verd=
ana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,=
255)"><br></span></p><p 
style=3D"margin:0px"><span style=3D"color:rgb(51,51=
,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;backgrou=
nd-color:rgb(255,255,255)">[Parenthetically: Of course it is true that 
all =
these legal and technical distinctions are trivial nonsense! It is an inelu=
ctable fact that the online PostGutenberg medium has made technically and e=
conomically possible and easily feasible what was technically and economica=
lly impossible in the Gutenberg medium:=A0</span><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,=
51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;backgr=
ound-color:rgb(255,255,255)">to make all refereed research 
articles</em><sp=
an 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-se=
rif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0-- each, 
without e=
xception, an author give-away, written purely for research impact rather th=
an royalty income --=A0</span><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:=
verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,=
255,255)">immediately accessible to all would-be 
users</em><span style=3D"c=
olor:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size=
:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">, not just to subscribers: OA. 
Tha=
t outcome is both optimal and inevitable for research; researchers; their i=
nstitutions; their funders; the R&amp;D industry; students; teachers; 
journ=
alists; the developing world; access-denied scholars and scientists; the ge=
neral public; research uptake, productivity, impact and progress; and the t=
ax-payers who fund the research.=A0</span><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);=
font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-co=
lor:rgb(255,255,255)">The only parties with whose interests that 
optimal ou=
tcome is in conflict are the refereed-research publishers</em><span 
style=
=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font=
-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0who had been providing 
an =
essential service to research in the Gutenberg era. It is that publishing 
&=
quot;tail&quot; that is now trying to wag the research 
&quot;dog,&quot; to =
deter and delay what is optimal and inevitable for research for as long as =
possible, by invoking Gutenberg-era pseudo-legal pseudo-technicalities to t=
ry to embargo OA, by holding it hostage to their accustomed revenue streams=
 and=A0</span><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,he=
lvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">modus =
operandi</em><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,h=
elvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">. 
OA =
mandates, the immediate-deposit clause, and the eprint-request Button are t=
he research community&#39;s means of mooting these delay tactics and 
hasten=
ing the natural evolution to the optimal and inevitable outcome in the Post=
Gutenberg era.]</span><br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,=
arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)=
">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><span 
style=3D"color=
:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13p=
x;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">Sale, A., Couture, M., Rodrigues, 
E., =
Carr, L. and Harnad, S. (2012)=A0</span><a 
href=3D"http://eprints.ecs.soton=
.ac.uk/18511/" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helve=
tica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">Open 
Acce=
ss Mandates and the &quot;Fair Dealing&quot; Button</a><span 
style=3D"color=
:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13p=
x;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">. In:=A0</span><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(=
51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;bac=
kground-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><a 
href=3D"http://www.utppublishing.com/Dyn=
amic-Fair-Dealing-Creating-Canadian-Culture-Online.html" 
style=3D"color:rgb=
(0,51,102)">Dynamic Fair Dealing: Creating Canadian Culture 
Online</a></em>=
<span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans=
-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0(Rosemary 
J. Co=
ombe &amp; Darren Wershler, Eds.)</span></p>


--047d7b33daf22636f204e35c7b0c--

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

[BOAI] Re: 1st-Party Give-Aways vs. 3rd-Party Rip-Offs

From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum AT gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 09:22:12 -0400


Threading: [BOAI] 1st-Party Give-Aways vs. 3rd-Party Rip-Offs from amsciforum AT gmail.com
      • This Message

--089e01681420ca7cd804e36f8b9f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Joseph Greene <joseph.greene AT ucd.ie> 
wrote:

*SH:*
      "If supplying eprints to requesters could be delegated to 3rd 
parties
like Repository
Managers<https://theconversation.com/neuroscientists-need-to-embrace-open-a=
ccess-publishing-too-16736#comment_198916>
to
perform automatically, then they would become violations of copyright
contracts.
      "What makes the eprint-request
Button<https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/RequestCopy> legal
is the fact that it is the *author* who decides, in each individual
instance, whether or not to comply with an individual eprint request for
his own work; *it does not happen automatically*."

*JG:*
>
       For what it=92s worth, we recently did some investigation into this =
to
> try and find a loop-hole. We looked at it from an ILL point of view,
> e-journal subscription licensing and legal deposit provision and came to
> the conclusion that there is no loop-hole to exploit in traditional libra=
ry
> service provision; if we were to implement the button it would have to be
> author mediated, not librarian mediated. Guess it would have to be stated
> in the CTA.
>

Why even try to search for a "loophole" that would allow the 
fulfillment of
Button-press eprint-requests from users to be taken out of the hands of the
author and put into the hands of a 3rd party?

Not only would that have made the Button illegal, thereby defeating its
purpose in mooting publisher embargoes.

It would also have deprived the author of a useful metric of research
impact: number of eprint requests (not quite the same thing as number of
downloads).

(The eprint-request count is perhaps even a bit of a 2-edged sword, in that
some authors may actually come to *prefer* the Button to OA, because of the
feedback it provides as to who is requesting their work! We can be fairly
confident, though, that the growth of OA mandates worldwide -- and with
it the growth of immediate-OA as well as of Almost-OA from Button-generated
eprint-requests -- will in most cases increase the pressure for
immediate-OA, hasten the demise of OA embargoes, and with it the need for
the Button.)

So, please, leave well enough alone. Mandate deposit immediately upon
acceptance for publication, but otherwise, having mandated the N-1 of the
author keystrokes required for deposit, leave the Nth keystroke to the
author.

(I don't even think it's a good idea for the library to relieve the author
of the responsibility to make the first N-1 keystrokes, though this would
certainly not be illegal: We are talking about a few extra minutes worth of
keystrokes per paper. Authors can delegate those to secretaries, research
assistants or students, but they are left entirely to the library
immediate-deposit will not become the natural milestone in the author's
research cycle that it needs to become, in order to ensure that the deposit
is done at all: the dated acceptance letter from the journal is sent to the
author. That sets the date of immediate-deposit, and also determines which
version is the final, accepted one. The publication date is uncertain and
could be as much as a year or more after acceptance. In other words, the
indeterminacy of the publication date could be even longer than OA
embargoes.)

(One of the flaws in the Harvard-style mandate -- OA rights reservation by
default, with an author opt-out option -- is that instead of mandating that
authors deposit in the repository, it mandates that they provide refereed
draft to the Provost. But the Provosts have been sitting on those refereed
drafts, again even longer than the embargoes they were meant to circumvent,
instead of making them immediately OA, or at least Almost-OA.)

Mandate immediate-deposit and leave the rest in the hands of the author.

Put all administrative efforts instead into monitoring mandate compliance
-- by systematically collecting the dated acceptance letters instead of the
papers themselves, and ensuring that the repository deposit-date is within
a few days or weeks of the acceptance date.

*Stevan Harnad*


> ****
>
> ** Joseph Greene
>
> Research Repository and Systems Librarian****
>
> James Joyce Library****
>
> University College Dublin****
>
> (353 0)1 716 7398****
>
> (353 0)1 716 7686****
>
> joseph.greene AT ucd.ie****
>
>
>

--089e01681420ca7cd804e36f8b9f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Joseph Greene <span 
dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:joseph.greene AT ucd.ie" 
target=3D"_blank">joseph.greene AT ucd.ie</a>=
&gt;</span> wrote:<div><blockquote type=3D"cite" 
style=3D"font-family:Helve=
tica;font-size:medium">
<div style=3D"margin:0px"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:ve=
rdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,25=
5,255)"><b>SH:</b></span></div><div 
style=3D"margin:0px"><span style=3D"col=
or:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1=
3px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0 =A0 =A0 &quot;If 
supplying eprin=
ts to requesters could be=A0</span><a 
href=3D"https://theconversation.com/n=
euroscientists-need-to-embrace-open-access-publishing-too-16736#comment_198=
916" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-=
serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">delegated to 
3rd pa=
rties like Repository Managers</a><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-f=
amily:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rg=
b(255,255,255)">=A0to perform automatically, then they would become 
violati=
ons of copyright contracts.=A0</span></div>
<div style=3D"margin:0px"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:ve=
rdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,25=
5,255)">=A0 =A0 =A0 &quot;What makes the=A0</span><a 
href=3D"https://wiki.d=
uraspace.org/display/DSPACE/RequestCopy" 
style=3D"font-size:13px;color:rgb(=
0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;background-color:r=
gb(255,255,255)">eprint-request Button</a><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51=
);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-=
color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0legal is the fact that it is 
the=A0</span><em st=
yle=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;f=
ont-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">author</em><span style=3D"=
color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-siz=
e:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">=A0who decides, in each 
individua=
l instance, whether or not to comply with an individual eprint request for =
his own work;=A0</span><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana=
,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255=
)">it does not happen automatically</em><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);=
font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px;background-co=
lor:rgb(255,255,255)">.&quot;=A0</span></div>
</blockquote><div><div 
class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc 
solid;padding-left:1ex"=
><div lang=3D"EN-US" link=3D"#3366CC" 
vlink=3D"#3366CC"><div><p class=3D"Ms=
oNormal"><span 
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&q=
uot;sans-serif&quot;"><b>JG:</b></span>=A0</p>
</div></div></blockquote><blockquote 
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div 
lang=3D"EN-US"=
 link=3D"#3366CC" vlink=3D"#3366CC"><div><p 
class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=
=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;=
">=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0For what it=92s worth, we recently did some 
investigation =
into this to try and find a loop-hole. We looked at it from an ILL point of=
 view, e-journal subscription licensing and legal deposit provision and cam=
e to the conclusion that there is no loop-hole to exploit in traditional li=
brary service provision; if we were to implement the button it would have t=
o be author mediated, not librarian mediated. Guess it would have to be sta=
ted in the CTA.</span></p>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Why even try to search for a &=
quot;loophole&quot; that would allow the fulfillment of Button-press 
eprint=
-requests from users to be taken out of the hands of the author and put int=
o the hands of a 3rd party?</div>
<div><br></div><div>Not only would that have made the 
Button illegal, there=
by defeating its purpose in mooting publisher 
embargoes.</div><div><br></di=
v><div>It would also have deprived the author of a useful metric of 
researc=
h impact: number of eprint requests (not quite the same thing as number of =
downloads).</div>
<div><br></div><div>(The eprint-request count is 
perhaps even a bit of a 2-=
edged sword, in that some authors may actually come to 
<i>prefer</i> the Bu=
tton to OA, because of the feedback it provides as to who is requesting the=
ir work! We can be fairly confident, though, that the growth of OA mandates=
 worldwide=A0-- and with it=A0the growth of immediate-OA as well as of Almo=
st-OA from Button-generated eprint-requests -- will in most cases increase =
the pressure for immediate-OA, hasten the demise of OA embargoes, and with =
it the need for the Button.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>So, please, leave well enough 
alone. Mandate deposit im=
mediately upon acceptance for publication, but otherwise, having mandated t=
he N-1 of the author keystrokes required for deposit, leave the Nth keystro=
ke to the author.</div>
<div><br></div><div>(I don&#39;t even think 
it&#39;s a good idea for the li=
brary to relieve the author of the responsibility to make the first N-1 key=
strokes, though this would certainly not be illegal: We are talking about a=
 few extra minutes worth of keystrokes per paper. Authors can delegate thos=
e to secretaries, research assistants or students, but they are left entire=
ly to the library immediate-deposit will not become the natural milestone i=
n the author&#39;s research cycle that it needs to become, in order to 
ensu=
re that the deposit is done at all: the dated acceptance letter from the jo=
urnal is sent to the author. That sets the date of immediate-deposit, and a=
lso determines which version is the final, accepted one. The publication da=
te is uncertain and could be as much as a year or more after acceptance. In=
 other words, the indeterminacy of the publication date could be even longe=
r than OA embargoes.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>(One of the flaws in the 
Harvard-style mandate -- OA ri=
ghts reservation by default, with an author opt-out option -- is that inste=
ad of mandating that authors deposit in the repository, it mandates that th=
ey provide refereed draft to the Provost. But the Provosts have been sittin=
g on those refereed drafts, again even longer than the embargoes they were =
meant to circumvent, instead of making them immediately OA, or at least Alm=
ost-OA.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>Mandate immediate-deposit and leave 
the rest in the han=
ds of the author.=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Put 
all administrative effort=
s instead into monitoring mandate compliance -- by systematically collectin=
g the dated acceptance letters instead of the papers themselves, and ensuri=
ng that the repository deposit-date is within a few days or weeks of the ac=
ceptance date.</div>
<div><br></div><div><b>Stevan 
Harnad</b></div><div>=A0</div><blockquote cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px 
#ccc solid;pa=
dding-left:1ex"><div lang=3D"EN-US" 
link=3D"#3366CC" vlink=3D"#3366CC"><p c=
lass=3D"MsoNormal">
<span 
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-=
serif&quot;"><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D=
"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;"><=
u></u>=A0</span><span 
style=3D"color:gray;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;fo=
nt-size:11pt">Joseph Greene</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-IE" 
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-=
family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:gray">Research Repo=
sitory and Systems 
Librarian<u></u><u></u></span></p><p 
class=3D"MsoNormal"=
><span lang=3D"EN-IE" 
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&q=
uot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:gray">James Joyce 
Library<u></u><u></u></=
span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-IE" 
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-=
family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:gray">University Co=
llege Dublin<u></u><u></u></span></p><p 
class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"E=
N-IE" 
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-=
serif&quot;;color:gray">(353 0)1 716 
7398<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-IE" 
style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-=
family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:gray">(353 0)1 716 =
7686<u></u><u></u></span></p><p 
class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-IE" st=
yle=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&qu=
ot;;color:gray"><a href=3D"mailto:joseph.greene AT ucd.ie" 
target=3D"_blank">j=
oseph.greene AT 
ucd.ie</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p 
class=3D"MsoNormal"><br></p></div></blockquote></div></div></div>

--089e01681420ca7cd804e36f8b9f--

        
--      
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] [options] [help]

 E-mail:  openaccess@soros.org .