All this detail is contained in the report (Scholarly Publishing Practice 3, ALPSP, 2008 - http://www.alpsp.org/Ebusiness/ProductCatalog/Product.aspx?ID=44). It's free to ALPSP members, but others have to pay to access it. Sally Sally Morris South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex, UK BN13 3UU Tel: +44 (0)1903 871286 Email: sa...@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk
_____ From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Graham Triggs Sent: 05 February 2014 15:11 To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Charles Oppenheim on who owns the rights to scholarlyarticles An exclusive license, that prevents an author from exercising their copyright rights, may be "as good" as a copyright transfer as far as a publisher is concerned. In terms of the statistics you quote, do you know if that covers all types of publishers (for-profit, not-for-profit, societies, etc.), and if so, how does the breakdown correlate with the type of publisher? And how are publishers that publish a variety of closed, open and hybrid journals accounted for? G On 5 February 2014 13:17, Sally Morris <sa...@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk> wrote: I find Andrew's experience surprising. When Cox & Cox last looked into this (in 2008), 53% of publishers requested a copyright transfer, 20.8% asked for a licence to publish instead, and 6.6% did not require any written agreement. A further 19.6%, though initially asking for transfer of copyright, would on request provide a licence document instead. There had been a steady move away from transfer of copyright since 2003. Sally Sally Morris South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex, UK BN13 3UU Tel: +44 (0)1903 871286 <tel:%2B44%20%280%291903%20871286> Email: sa...@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk -----Original Message----- From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Andrew A. Adams Sent: 05 February 2014 00:04 To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Charles Oppenheim on who owns the rights to scholarly articles Chris Zielinski <ziggytheb...@gmail.com> wrote: > But even more prudent authors simply shouldn't sign the copyright > assignment form - publishers don't need anything more than a licence > to publish. Good luck with that if you're anything other than a tenured professor with a track record that means where your recent papers are published won't effect funding decisions (individually or for your univesity). I tried to apply this rule myself a few years ago and after a couple of occasions of getting nowhere with the publishers decided that doing this individually was just harming my career and not having any impact on the journals. Now, I just "archive and be damned"posting the author's final text (not the publisher PDF) in open depot ignoring any embargoes. If any publisher bothered to issue a take-down I'd reset to closed access (and always respond to button requests). None have so far. -- Professor Andrew A Adams a...@meiji.ac.jp Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan http://www.a-cubed.info/ _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
