Re: Research: Writ, Reason, and Practice
Charles - I as certainly not implying you were one of those using the copyright law discussion disingenuously - I know your work quite well (as you know). While I am very keen to ensure there is clarity on copyright law and practice (precedent)I am equally keen to ensure that researchers know that - in the domain of scholarly publishing / fair use / research education) - most (but not all) of the restrictions apparently imposed by copyright are, in fact, illusory. Once this is widely known, appreciated, accepted then one of the FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) barriers to green OA (Harnad definition) is removed. Best Keith -- Prof Keith G Jeffery E: keith.jeff...@stfc.ac.uk Director Information Technology International Strategy Science and Technology Facilities Council Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Harwell Science and Innovation Campus Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK T: +44 1235 44 6103 F:+44 1235 44 5147 President ERCIM STFC Director: http://www.ercim.org/ W3C Office at CLRC-RAL http://www.w3.org/ President euroCRIShttp://www.eurocris.org/ VLDB Trustee Emeritus: http://www.vldb.org/ EDBT Board Member http://www.edbt.org/ -- The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the intended recipient only. If you are not one of the intended recipients do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but return this email to the sender and delete your copy of it The CCLRC telecommunications systems may be monitored in accordance with the policy available from http://dlitd.dl.ac.uk/policy/monitoring/monitoring%20statement.htm. -- -Original Message- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of C.Oppenheim Sent: 05 August 2009 07:41 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Research: Writ, Reason, and Practice I hope I am not included by Keith as amongst those who use copyright debates to restrict OA. I have consistently urged authors NOT to assign copyright to publishers so that they are indeed free to self-archive. If authors are foolish enough to assign copyrigh to OA unfriendly publishers, they only have themselves to blame if the law then puts barriers to self-archiving in their way. But there is no point in pretending there isn't a legal barrier under such circumstances. Charles On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:00:05 +0100 Jeffery, KG (Keith) keith.jeff...@stfc.ac.uk wrote: Stevan - many thanks for a succinct summary. However, while I agree it has nothing to do strictly with green OA, the subject of copyright has been used by some disingenuously to try to dissuade authors from self-archiving of peer-reviewed material as you well know. Debunking the myth could prove useful to achieving greater than 15% self-archiving. best Keith -- Prof Keith G Jeffery E: keith.jeff...@stfc.ac.uk mailto:k...@rl.ac.uk Director Information Technology International Strategy Science and Technology Facilities Council Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Harwell Science and Innovation Campus Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK T: +44 1235 44 6103 F:+44 1235 44 5147 President ERCIM STFC Director: http://www.ercim.org/ W3C Office at CLRC-RAL http://www.w3.org/ President euroCRIS http://www.eurocris.org/ VLDB Trustee Emeritus: http://www.vldb.org/ EDBT Board Member http://www.edbt.org/ -- -- -- The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the intended recipient only. If you are not one of the intended recipients do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but return this email to the sender and delete your copy of it The CCLRC telecommunications systems may be monitored in accordance with the policy available from http://dlitd.dl.ac.uk/policy/monitoring/monitoring%20statement.htm. -- -- -- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: 04 August 2009 11:45 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Research: Writ, Reason, and Practice To summarise: Arthur is at pains to try to squeeze some reason out of (or into) an incoherent formal writ that does not fit research writing
Re: Research: Writ, Reason, and Practice
Stevan - many thanks for a succinct summary. However, while I agree it has nothing to do strictly with green OA, the subject of copyright has been used by some disingenuously to try to dissuade authors from self-archiving of peer-reviewed material as you well know. Debunking the myth could prove useful to achieving greater than 15% self-archiving. best Keith -- Prof Keith G Jeffery E: keith.jeff...@stfc.ac.uk Director Information Technology International Strategy Science and Technology Facilities Council Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Harwell Science and Innovation Campus Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK T: +44 1235 44 6103 F:+44 1235 44 5147 President ERCIM STFC Director: http://www.ercim.org/ W3C Office at CLRC-RAL http://www.w3.org/ President euroCRIS http://www.eurocris.org/ VLDB Trustee Emeritus: http://www.vldb.org/ EDBT Board Memberhttp://www.edbt.org/ -- The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the intended recipient only. If you are not one of the intended recipients do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but return this email to the sender and delete your copy of it The CCLRC telecommunications systems may be monitored in accordance with the policy available from http://dlitd.dl.ac.uk/policy/monitoring/monitoring%20statement.htm. -- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: 04 August 2009 11:45 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Research: Writ, Reason, and Practice To summarise: Arthur is at pains to try to squeeze some reason out of (or into) an incoherent formal writ that does not fit research writing and practice and never has. Charles is at pains to point out that researcher practice for a half-century, though ubiquitous and uncontested, is not literally in conformity with current formal writ, be it coherent or incoherent, fitting or ill-fitting, so it might be a good idea to rewrite the writ. I say let those whose priority is to reformulate incoherent and ill-fitting formal writs go ahead and pursue their priority. But meanwhile, let researchers continue their ubiquitous and uncontested practice: Full speed ahead. Aside: This formal side-issue has next to nothing to do with Open Access and Green Open Access Mandates. http://bit.ly/S9u1H Amen. Stevan Harnad On 4-Aug-09, at 2:53 AM, C.Oppenheim wrote: Was ever thus, Arthur. If I make copies of a document in a country with no copyright laws at all, and attempt to bring them into another country, I am breaking the other country's copyright laws if they are infringing under that other country's rules. Every country with copyright law has a clause which says it is an offence to import copies that would be infringing. If such laws didn't exist, you'd get copyright havens with little or no copyright laws, from which people could export their infringing copies around the world. It's not murky at all - it is the basis of international copyright agreements! For the record, it's Clause 27(3) of the UK Act. You may find this all very frustrating; if you don't like it, lobby to change the law, but don't deny what the law says. Charles On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:30:58 +1000 Arthur Sale a...@ozemail.com.au wrote: Charles You miss the point. As the copy leaves my Australian hands, it is not an infringing copy. It falls under an exemption and is perfectly legal. From there you get into the murkier water of trans-border 'law'. However, it seems extraordinarily likely that if I send to someone in the UK or EU a perfectly legal copy that they have a perfect right to accept it in the absence of any specific customs or ownership legislation to the contrary, for example as occurs with the receipt of banned drugs mailed from abroad. No such UK or EU or German law exists in respect of the holding of copyright works as far as I know.
Re: Changes in publisher policies on repository deposit?
All - and are in pdf which is an awful format for any re-purposing. Also, well-organised institutional repositories are connected to a CRIS (Current Research Information System) which (assuming it uses CERIF - Common Research Information Format - an EU recommendation to member states) provides contextual (meta)data on such things as persons, organisational units (groups, departments), projects, funding, facilities and equipment used, patents, products (including research datasets and software), publications, events - i.e. the research 'space' associated with the publication. More information at www.eurocris.org/cerif Of course all of this information is needed attached to the publication for most re-purposing and also for research evaluation. Keith -- Prof Keith G Jeffery E: keith.jeff...@stfc.ac.uk Director Information Technology International Strategy Science and Technology Facilities Council Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Harwell Science and Innovation Campus Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK T: +44 1235 44 6103 F:+44 1235 44 5147 President ERCIM STFC Director: http://www.ercim.org/ W3C Office at STFC-RAL http://www.w3.org/ President euroCRIS http://www.eurocris.org/ VLDB Trustee Emeritus: http://www.vldb.org/ EDBT Board Memberhttp://www.edbt.org/ -- The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the intended recipient only. If you are not one of the intended recipients do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but return this email to the sender and delete your copy of it The STFC telecommunications systems may be monitored in accordance with the policy available from http://dlitd.dl.ac.uk/policy/monitoring/monitoring%20statement.htm. -- Please note that from 20081006 all my email will be sent out from stfc in the format above. However, incoming email using other email addresses for me will work for the forseeable future. Nonetheless, you are advised to change any address book entries or typed 'to' email addresses to the new address provided above. --- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Morag Greig Sent: 02 June 2009 16:45 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Changes in publisher policies on repository deposit? Because the copies on Elsevier's website are NOT freely accessible. Morag Morag Greig Advocacy Manager (Enlighten) Direct line: +44(0)141 330 6797 Fax: +44(0)141 330 4952 E-mail: m.gr...@lib.gla.ac.uk Library University of Glasgow Hillhead Street Glasgow G12 8QE www.lib.gla.ac.uk The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401 -Original Message- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org]On Behalf Of Sally Morris Sent: 02 June 2009 15:36 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Changes in publisher policies on repository deposit? Let me be heretical here In this interconnected environment, why does it matter where the freely accessible version is? Sally Sally Morris South House, The Street Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK Tel: +44(0)1903 871286 Fax: +44(0)8701 202806 Email: sa...@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: 02 June 2009 14:32 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Changes in publisher policies on repository deposit? On 2-Jun-09, at 8:05 AM, Peter Suber wrote: [Forwarding from Fred Friend via the JISC-Repositories list. --Peter Suber.] To all repository managers: Rumours are spreading that Elsevier staff are approaching UK Vice-Chancellors persuading them to point to PDF copies of articles on Elsevier's web-site rather than have the articles deposited in institutional repositories. It appears that the argument being used is that this will be a cheaper option than maintaining
Re: Liblicense-l: rules of the road
All - As others have said let us get back to the purpose of this thread and stop fretting about how it is moderated; the vote has taken place, let us all get on with sharing experiences, views and proposals concerning the real challenges we face. Keith -- Prof Keith G Jeffery E: keith.jeff...@stfc.ac.uk Director Information Technology International Strategy Science and Technology Facilities Council Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Harwell Science and Innovation Campus Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK T: +44 1235 44 6103 F:+44 1235 44 5147 President ERCIM STFC Director: http://www.ercim.org/ W3C Office at STFC-RAL http://www.w3.org/ President euroCRIShttp://www.eurocris.org/ VLDB Trustee Emeritus: http://www.vldb.org/ EDBT Board Member http://www.edbt.org/ -- The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the intended recipient only. If you are not one of the intended recipients do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but return this email to the sender and delete your copy of it The CCLRC telecommunications systems may be monitored in accordance with the policy available from http://dlitd.dl.ac.uk/policy/monitoring/monitoring%20statement.htm. --- --- Please note that from 20081006 all my email will be sent out from stfc in the format above. However, incoming email using other email addresses for me will work for the forseeable future. Nonetheless, you are advised to change any address book entries or typed 'to' email addresses to the new address provided above. --- -Original Message- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Leslie Carr Sent: 23 October 2008 17:08 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Liblicense-l: rules of the road On 23 Oct 2008, at 12:09, Sally Morris (Morris Associates) wrote: Here's a set of 'rules' for another email discussion forum, one which I personally think is moderated in an exemplary fashion I expect there are hundreds of other discussion forums whose charters and processes are indeed praiseworthy. To forestall a combinatorial explosion of admirable attributes, let me draw the attention of those who are interested to the following analysis of the diverse practices of mailing list moderation: Berge, Z.L. Collins, M.P. (2000). Perceptions of e-moderators about their roles and functions in moderating electronic mailing lists. Distance Education: An International Journal, 21(1), 81-100. http://www.emoderators.com/moderators/modsur97.html Given the range of practices represented above and the result of the recent vote, I propose that the status quo is admirable position to maintain. (Moderation-wise, not OA-wise!) -- Les Carr -- Scanned by iCritical.
Re: Call for a vote of nonconfidence in the moderator of the AmSci Forum
[ The following text is in the utf-8 character set. ] [ Your display is set for the iso-8859-1 character set. ] [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] And me (on pda travelling) Prof Keith G Jeffery -Original Message- From: Alma Swan a.s...@talk21.com To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Sent: 07/10/08 20:00 Subject: Re: Call for a vote of nonconfidence in the moderator of the AmSci Forum I agree. Stevan should remain, doing his own inimitable thing, which has been invaluable for OA. He keeps things focused and provides an input that is uniquely useful. Count me in on the 'aye' side, please. Alma Swan Key Perspectives Ltd Truro, UK --- On Tue, 7/10/08, Tony Hey tony@microsoft.com wrote: From: Tony Hey tony@microsoft.com Subject: Re: Call for a vote of nonconfidence in the moderator of the AmSci Forum To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Date: Tuesday, 7 October, 2008, 3:40 PM I absolutely agree with Michael - the list would die without Stevan Tony -Original Message- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Michael Eisen Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 7:26 AM To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Call for a vote of nonconfidence in the moderator of the AmSci Forum I disagree with Stevan often. He can be infuriating. He has a tendency to bloviate. Nonetheless - he has been a FANTASTIC moderator of this list. I have sent off many posts that have criticized Stevan directly, and he has never failed to send them to the group. I can think of no other list that has not just lasted for 10 years, but kept up a high level of discourse and relevance. Stevan has my complete confidence. The list would die without him. On Oct 7, 2008, at 5:37 AM, Stevan Harnad wrote: On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:37 AM, c.oppenh...@lboro.ac.uk c.oppenh...@lboro.ac.uk wrote: I totally support Jean-Claude's view. I can only repeat what I said before: (1) I am happy to put an end to my 10-year moderatorship of the American Scientist Open Access Forum and hand it over to someone else who is willing to do it, but only if it is requested by a plurality of the membership, not if it is merely requested by a few dissatisfied members. (2) The moderator's role is to filter postings, approving the relevant ones, and rejecting the off-topic or ad-hominem ones. (3) Apart from that, the moderator has no special status or authority (other than what may accrue from the substance of his postings), and may post *exactly* as any other poster may post, including the posting of quotes, comments, critiques, elaborations, rebuttals *and summaries*. By my count, there have not been many votes one way or the other, but of the few votes there have been, more seem to be expressing confidence in my moderatorship than those that are calling for me to be replaced. I have also been accused of of censorship, by both Jean-Claude and Sally, the charge being subsequently rescinded. If there are doubts about whether I can be trusted to post or tally the votes -- or, more important, if we are to spare the Forum the bandwidth of votes appearing instead of OA substance -- I am also quite happy to direct the votes to be sent to a trusted 3rd party for tallying, if that is the wish of the Forum. Stevan Harnad Charles Professor Charles Oppenheim Head Department of Information Science Loughborough University Loughborough Leics LE11 3TU Tel 01509-223065 Fax 01509 223053 e mail c.oppenh...@lboro.ac.uk From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS- fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Claude Guédon Sent: 06 October 2008 19:00 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: American Scientist Open Access Forum settings What I note is that my messages sometimes appear back very late and I wonder why. It is this detail which caused my recent angry reaction. While we are on technical matters, I would appreciate two things from this moderator/actor: 1. That he should refrain from ever summarizing somebody's words. We are all versed enough in the art of reading to be able to survive without this doubtful form of help. Besides, list moderators are not mentors or paternal figures. When the summary ends up distorting the original message, it becomes reprehensible; 2. Since the moderator also intervenes as member in this list, he should make clear which of his interventions are moderating interventions and which ones are
Re: Convergent IR Deposit Mandates vs. Divergent CR Deposit Mandates
All - I know that at this point Alma and Stevan would expect me to point out that - as well as OA IRs - there are other systems maintained by funders and research institutions. These are called CRIS (Current Research Information Systems)and there is an EU Recommendation to member states (i.e. a standard) named CERIF (Common European Research Information Format) which has formal syntax and defined semantics and is thus ideal for interoperation even in a multilingual environment. Since researchers move quite a lot and may have multiple (simultaneous or sequential) affiliations to research organisations, funders etc the data model has to have timestamped role-based relationships between major entities like persons, institutions, publications etc. This is much more expressive than DC-type metadata. CERIF also has the necessary attributes to generate appropriate publication metadata in Dublin Core, MARC and the various bibliographic reference standards (like APA, Vancouver, Chicago, BibTex etc). Finally, CERIF also provides context for the research i.e. research project information and what (if any) facilities and equipment used, events attended etc. Details at www.eurocris.org/cerif So instead of trying to add (non formal (or semi-sructured)syntax and variable semantics, DC-type) metadata into IRs I recommend strongly using the data structure of CERIF and link it to the full-text (multimedia) in the IR. Of course the same technique works for research datasets and software etc etc Best Keith
RE: Acces a des contenus de savoir
N Miradon - An interesting site. Somewhat francophilein content as well as interface!! However, I checked for the top ICT experts in my field in France and none of them is represented. My own view is such 'secondary' or 'overlay' sites will be useful but only when Stevan's target of 95% fill of OA IRs is achieved Best, Keith -- Prof Keith G Jeffery E: k...@rl.ac.uk Director Information Technology International Strategy Science and Technology Facilities Council Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Harwell Science and Innovation Campus Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK T: +44 1235 44 6103 F:+44 1235 44 5147 President ERCIM STFC Director: http://www.ercim.org/ W3C Office at STFC-RAL http://www.w3.org/ President euroCRIShttp://www.eurocris.org/ VLDB Trustee Emeritus: http://www.vldb.org/ EDBT Board Member http://www.edbt.org/ -- The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the intended recipient only. If you are not one of the intended recipients do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but return this email to the sender and delete your copy of it The CCLRC telecommunications systems may be monitored in accordance with the policy available from http://dlitd.dl.ac.uk/policy/monitoring/monitoring%20statement.htm. -- -Original Message- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of N. Miradon Sent: 05 April 2008 09:23 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Accès à des contenus de savoir From yesterday's Le Monde:- Status: O Olivier Amiel a ... créé ... un site, www.accedit.com, qui donne accès à des contenus de savoir (plusieurs milliers d'articles, mémoires, thèses) provenant de centres de recherches réputés ou d'universités. ... Est aussi proposé aux chercheurs ou aux laboratoires scientifiques de publier leurs textes, après validation d'un comité d'experts. Les auteurs en gardent la propriété et ils en assument la responsabilité. Ils reçoivent 15 % des droits sur le chiffre d'affaires produit par la consultation des textes ... [1] From the Accedit website:- Status: O L'accès à des connaissances solides et fiables est aujourd'hui la clef de la réflexion intellectuelle, de la compréhension du monde, et du développement de l'action. Mais ces connaissances, bien souvent, ne sont pas diffusées systématiquement, ni sous forme de livre, ni sous forme de fichier électronique, et demeurent confidentielles, alors qu'elles pourraient être utiles à un large public. Accedit veut faire le lien entre ces documents sous-exploités et un public sans cesse à la recherche d'informations précises, pour qui il est vital d'avoir accès à un savoir rigoureusement sélectionné et régulièrement mis à jour. [2] The only way of browsing this site appears to be via a brain-dead Index des Mots Clés (Absence, Absurde, Accomplissement ... Zinc, Zone de Proche Développement, Zoométéorologie). I am not clear whether this is a Good, or a Bad, Thing. N Miradon [1] http://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/2008/04/03/les-nouveaux-editeurs-s-appuient-sur-internet_1030401_0.html [2] http://www.accedit.com/index.php
Re: Interview with Elsevier Science
Richard - thanks for the opportunity to comment via the September98 Forum list My department's responsibility includes the library so we have thought about it from both librarian and IT angles. I note also the comments from others to date. Our main qustions would concern: (1) Business model Elsevier see in the future as web-publishing of eprints increases (2) how will they (and other conventional publishers) continue to claim peer-review monopoly (3) how much will they comply with standards such as OAI especially for metadata (4) what is their stance concerning SPARC (5) will they move to leaving copyright with the author and having a licence to publish (6) in e-publishing do they favour PDF (frozen image) or dynamic SGML, XML or HTML (7) do they have interest in dvelopment from dictionaries and thesauri to domain ontologies to assist clssification and retrieval I hope that's enough to be going on with! K -- Prof Keith G Jeffery Director Information Technology and Head Business Information Technology Department k...@rl.ac.uk CLRC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory T:+44 1235 44 6103 Chilton, Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK F:+44 1235 44 5831 WWW Person: http://www.bitd.clrc.ac.uk/Person/K.G.Jeffery Department: http://www.bitd.clrc.ac.uk VP VLDB Endowment Board: http://www.vldb.org/ CLRC ERCIM Representative: http://www.ercim.org/ W3C Office at CLRC-RAL http://www.w3.org/ -- The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the intended recipients only. If you are not one of the intended recipients do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but return this email to the sender and delete your copy of it
