UC Authors No Longer Receive PLOS Publishing Fee Discounts

The Public Library of Science (PLOS) retired its Institutional Membership Program as of October 2013. Therefore, UC authors will no longer receive a PLOS publishing fee discount.  Articles submitted on January 1, 2014 or afterwards are no longer eligible for the discount.

Categories: Uncategorized

SCOAP3 to start on 1 January 2014 !

Geneva 5 December 2013
After intense preparations and consensus building, CERN has today confirmed that the SCOAP3 Open Access publishing initiative will start on 1 January 2014. With the support of partners in 24 countries, a vast fraction of scientific articles in the field of High-Energy Physics will become Open Access at no cost for any author: everyone will be able to read them; authors will retain copyright; and generous licenses will enable wide re-use of this information.
press release

Categories: Uncategorized

UC Open Access Policy

University of California faculty have passed an Open Access Policy for their scholarly articles. Deposit began on November 1st for UC Irvine, UCLA, and UCSF. For UC San Diego, deposit will begin in 2014.
Watch a 90-second introduction to the policy.
For more information, please visit: uc-oa.info

Categories: Uncategorized

FIRST Act Threatens to Delay Public Access

If passed, the Frontiers in Innovation, Research, Science and Technology Act of 2013 (FIRST) would impede the public’s ability to access taxpayer-funded research by restricting federal science agencies’ ability to provide timely, equitable, online access to articles and data reporting on the results of research that they support.  Section 302 of the bill would undercut federal agencies’ ability to effectively implement the widely-supported White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Directive on Public Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research, and undermine the public access program pioneered by the National Institutes of Health (NIH),  significantly delaying American taxpayer access to results of the crucial research funded by their taxpayer dollars, and stifling critical advancements in life-saving research and scientific discovery.

Specifically, the language in Section 302 sanctions locking up articles reporting on taxpayer-funded research for up to 3 years, a time frame more than double of similar policies in effect around the world.  Other effects of the bill are mentioned in the talking points on the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) website.

If you care about keeping publicly-funded research results available, consult the SPARC website for more information and for suggestions about things you can do to voice your opposition to the bill, particularly Section 302.

Categories: Uncategorized

Open Access Week

Open Access Week is a global event now entering its sixth year. It’s an opportunity for the academic and research community to learn about the potential benefits of Open Access, to share with colleagues, and to help inspire wider participation in helping to make Open Access a new norm in scholarship and research.

There are all kinds of sources to learn about Open Access. A timely one is a very useful webliography by Diane Dawson in this month’s College & Research Libraries News (C&RL-ACRL) that is, in itself, a useful tool for faculty authors. Dawson, Diane. 2013. Making your publications open access: Resources to assist researchers. College & Research Libraries News, 74(9), 473-476.

Along with links to Peter Suber’s (open access, downloadable) book for an overview, there are links to the Registry of Open Access Repositories Mandatory Archiving Policies; SHERPA/JULIET (detailing funders’ requirements); several links related to Creative Commons licensing, author addendums and copyright information. And much, much more…

As noted below, the UC San Diego Library is hosting a panel discussion for graduate students called “Demystifying Open Access” on Tuesday, October 22, 2013, which will be held from 3:30-5:00 pm in the Seuss Room at Geisel Library.

Categories: Uncategorized

UC Open Access Policy Implementation (OAPI) Project Wiki

On July 24, 2013, the Academic Senate of the University of California passed an Open Access Policy, ensuring that future research articles authored by faculty at all 10 campuses of UC will be made available to the public at no charge.

The Open Access Policy Implementation (OAPI) project is a partnership between the California Digital Library and UC campuses to build tools and services that will support faculty participation in the UC Open Access Policy, including:

  • An enhanced and streamlined workflow for depositing articles into UC’s eScholarship open access repository
  • Automated publication harvesting and notification system for UC authors, to reduce the need for manual deposit
  • Support for the generation of embargo, waiver, and addendum forms, at the author’s request

The OAPI project wiki is a public space that allows the tracking of implementation planning activities, timelines, and deliverables. The wiki reflects the current status of the project and will continue to be updated as it evolves. Visit the wiki to get an overview of this complex project.

Categories: Uncategorized

2013 University of California Open Access Policy

The Academic Senate of the University of California passed an Open Access Policy on July 24, 2013, ensuring that future research articles authored by faculty at all 10 campuses of UC will be made available to the public at no charge.

The policy covers more than 8,000 UC faculty and as many as 40,000 publications a year. By granting a license to the University of California prior to any contractual arrangement with publishers, faculty members can now make their research widely and publicly available, re-use it for various purposes, or modify it for future research publications.

Faculty on three campuses (UCLA, UCI and UCSF) will begin depositing articles in eScholarship on November 1, 2013. Progress on deposit implementation will be reviewed during the following year. Deposit of articles by faculty on the remaining campuses is expected to begin on November 1, 2014.

More at http://osc.universityofcalifornia.edu/openaccesspolicy/

Categories: Uncategorized

Track the progress of current Open Access bills in California, Illinois, and New York

California AB-609, California Taxpayer Access to Publicly Funded Research
Passed the Assembly, sent to the Senate and referred to committees

Illinois SB1900, Open Access to Research Articles Act
Passed both Houses, on the Governor’s desk

New York (Senate version) S4050-2013, Taxpayer Access to Publicly Funded Research (TAPFR)
New York  (Assembly version) A180-2013, Taxpayer Access to Publicly Funded Research (TAPFR)
Sent to committee in each House

Nature special issue: The future of publishing

After nearly 400 years in the slow-moving world of print, the scientific publishing industry is suddenly being thrust into a fast-paced online world of cloud computing, crowd sourcing and ubiquitous sharing. Long-established practices are being challenged by new ones – most notably, the open-access, author-pays publishing model. In this special issue, Nature takes a close look at the forces now at work in scientific publishing, and how they may play out over the coming decades.


Categories: Uncategorized

Supreme Court Upholds Application of First-Sale Doctrine to Works Created Abroad

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled yesterday, by a 6-3 vote, that the so-called First Sale doctrine protects the right of individuals and organizations, including libraries, who wish to purchase and import copyrighted documents such as  books or DVDs which are published, printed, or manufactured outside of the U.S. to re-sell the item or give those items away or, in a library context, circulate it freely. The case–Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.–pitted a Thai national, Supap Kirtsaeng, a student at Cornell and later at the University of Southern California, against the large textbook publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.  Kirtsaeng had purchased copies of Wiley textbooks that were printed outside the U.S. and imported them to the U.S., where he sold them at higher prices as a means of helping to pay for his educational expenses. Wiley initially won a decision, which was upheld by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals; Kirtsaeng then appealed to the Supreme Court, which overturned the previous decision. 

The First Sale doctrine essentially states that the purchaser of a copyrighted work, whether an individual or a corporate entity, can do with the purchased item anything he, she, or it wishes. The case turned on a phrase in the Copyright Act, which limits that doctrine to works “lawfully made under this title.”  Wiley said–and lower courts agreed–that textbooks manufactured outside the United States could not have been made under American law and so remained subject to the control of the owner of the copyright. But Justice Stephen G. Breyer, writing for the majority, said the phrase was not concerned with geography. He said he doubted “that Congress would have intended to create the practical copyright-related harms with which a geographical interpretation would threaten ordinary scholarly, artistic, commercial and consumer activities.” He concluded, “We hold that the ‘first sale’ doctrine applies to copies of a copyrighted work lawfully made abroad.”

Breyer focused on the potential consequences of a contrary ruling upholding the copyright owner which, he said, “could prevent a buyer from domestically selling or even giving away copies of a video game made in Japan, a film made in Germany or a dress (with a design copyright) made in China.”  He also relied on supporting briefs from libraries, used-book dealers, technology companies and museums, all of which warned that allowing copyright suits over goods imported from abroad would have pernicious consequences. Libraries could be barred from lending foreign books, the briefs said, and museums from displaying modern works of foreign  art.

Breyer was joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Thomas; Justices Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Scalia dissented. Writing for the minority, Justice Ginsburg wrote that the divided ruling is a bold departure from Congress’s intention to protect copyright owners against the unauthorized importation of low-priced, foreign-made copies of their copyrighted works that is made more stunning by its conflict with current U.S. trade policy.

Both publishing groups and other groups representing copyright owners on the one hand, and groups representing libraries on the other, predict that the decision will lead to pressure from the publishing industry for Congress to further amend the copyright law.  A spokesman for the Library Copyright Alliance stated that “Libraries and our allies remain vigilant in defense of first sale and all of the rights that make it possible to serve our communities.”

–Adapted and  condensed from articles published March 19th by Jennifer Howard in the Chronicle of Higher Education and by Adam Liptak in The New York Times.


Older Posts »