Thanks Fred,
At one level it is true that we get the contracts we deserve, but only if
the issues are known. And the #scholarlypoor does not get the contracts it
deserves.
>Peter's complaint that libraries do not challenge use or re-use clauses
in contracts is not absolutely true,
I give two examples - DRM ("Digital Rights Management") and TDM ("text and
data mining"). Libraries (including national libraries) have widely agreed
to practices that restrict access to and re-use of information. But these
issues were unknown to me and the general public before the contracts were
signed and the practices implemented. My libraries has signed rights with
major publishers that drastically restrict my rights to re-use the
information (via TDM) that my library has paid for. No one consulted me and
I doubt it anyone consulted a university board or committee. (I might use
FOI to find out - anyone can do it).
Yet this was done in secret because the publishers insist on secrecy and
the libraries agree. Whereas prices may be secrecy sensitive there is no
justification for not consulting on rights before signing. Libraries should
advertise what they are being asked to sign - only in that way do I have
any moral responsibility as an academic.
> And yet a very senior publisher once told me that librarians have much
more power than they realise.
Yes, but many librarians see their business with publishers as a
fundamental part of their existence. One librarian came to me
enthusiastically "isn't it wonderful - we can pay for TR's data citation
index". [my view is we should be building our own data citation index, not
handing control to commercial interests and I am trying to do part of it].
Another anecdote - when asked by an academic to publish his/her dataset "we
cannot archive academic datasets - our role is to buy datasets from
publishers".
>
>
> However, librarians cannot bear all of the blame for giving in too easily.
> My hard stance received no backing from senior academics, and no librarian
> can refuse to sign an unsatisfactory contract unless they know that they
> have solid support from within their university. Of course Elsevier and
> other publishers know this and that is why they want to conclude deals with
> senior university management, who will probably agree to unsatisfactory
> clauses even more readily than the librarians.
>
I have no idea which part of my university signed away my rights. I know it
was the librarians in UBC who did a deal with Elsevier to agree to give up
Heather Piwowar's rights to TDM and negotiate on a case-by-case basis.
>
>
> I am sorry to be cynical, but the academic community gets the contracts it
> deserves. We have to learn to say "no" and really mean it.
>
The #scholarlypoor does not get the contracts it deserves. The issues have
to be out in the open.
--
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
