Garret You raise an interesting query, and one which the UKPMC Funders Group are working to address.
In short, we want to avoid a situation where a researcher is required to deposit papers in both an IR (to meet their institutions mandate) and a central repository, like PMC and UKPMC, (to meet the needs of a funder such as the Wellcome Trust). To try to address this issue the Wellcome Trust (on behalf of the UKPMC Funders Group) is working with NCBI at the NIH (developer of the underlying UKPMC software) to devise a practical solution. Although on the face of it may appear easy to resolve this issue -- simply use the SWORD protocol to move content from repository A to repository B -- this approach does not address the rights issues. To give a very practical example there are some publishers (e.g. Elsevier) who allow authors to self-archive papers in an IR, but do NOT allow self-archiving in a central repository like PMC or UKPMC. To be clear, if such papers were harvested into UKPMC from an IR, then they would be subject to a formal take-down notice. In addition to the rights-management problem, there are other issues we need to address such as how a manuscript, ingested from an IR, could be attached to the relevant funder grant, and how a researcher could be motivated to "sign-off" the version of the document in PMC/UKPMC, given that they would have already deposited in the IR. [As you may be aware, every author manuscript in PMC and UKPMC is converted to XML. To ensure that no errors are introduced through this exercise, authors are required to sign-off the conversion before it can be released to the public archive.] In view of these issues our preferred approach is to encourage researchers to deposit centrally, and then provide IR's with a simple mechanism whereby this content can be ingested into their repository. Of course, even with the UKPMC to IR approach there may be rights management issues to address. This development work has only just begun but I will keep you (and this list) abreast of progress. Regards Robert Robert Kiley Head of Digital Services Wellcome Library -----Original Message----- From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:jisc-repositor...@jiscmail.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Garret McMahon Sent: 18 February 2010 12:05 To: jisc-repositor...@jiscmail.ac.uk Subject: Funder mandated deposit in centralised or subject based repositories Dear All, I have a general query regarding funder requirements that stipulate deposit into a centralised or subject based repository such as PubMed Central. Is anybody meeting such a requirement by developing processes that incorporate the institutional repository as the primary point of ingest and subsequently uploading content to the centralised service? I'm particularly interested in two aspects of this question. Firstly, how an institutional policy supporting the home repository does not find itself at variance with funder deposit policies that specify a preference for locus of deposit external to the institution. Secondly, what is critical to the home and centralised repositories in terms of service design in any such collaboration. Kind Regards, Garret McMahon Institutional Repository Content Manager - www.tara.tcd.ie Systems Office Ussher Library Trinity College Dublin 2 Ireland Tel: +353 1 896 1646 email:garret.mcma...@tcd.ie This message has been scanned for viruses by Websense Hosted Email Security - www.websense.com