Colin, I think you are missing the point of the "button" here. The correct way to phrase a mandate is that the "button" is solely a back-up to ONLY be used when there is a publisher embargo. I think the OU is correct in keeping the information requested to a minimum - a statement that the requester is requesting it for purposes within the legal allowances for authors to distribute it, and a contact address. Anyone really concerned with privacy can use short-term single-use email addresses to make their requests. Personally, I find that I want other schlars to know when I am reading their work because it opens up the possibility of interaction, the next stage beyond just reading people's work is to discuss it in more depth with them, but this is a sideline compared to the mass access that is the purpose of OA. The solution to the original question is for mandates to make clear what the purpose of the button is, and to not allow depositors to place a barrier to access where one is not necessary.
-- Dr Andrew A Adams, School of Systems Engineering The University of Reading, Reading, RG6 6AY, UK Tel:44-118-378-6997 E-mail:a.a.ad...@rdg.ac.uk http://www.rdg.ac.uk/~sis00aaa/ >From 1st April 2010: Professor, Graduate School of Business Administration, and Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics Meiji University, Tokyo