DOCSLIB.ORG

How to Publish for Free

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
How to Publish for Free How to publish for free Nola Steiner Senior Librarian (ABLE) University Library October 2018 Agenda ● What is Open Access (OA) publication? ● Why is OA publication important ? ● Options for OA publishing with no or reduced cost What is Open Access? Open Access (OA) material is digital, online, freely accessible and free of most copyright and licencing restrictions. https://aoasg.org.au/what-is-open-access/ Why make my work Open Access? • No limit to who has access to your research results – no paywall • Wider audience – greater opportunity for impact and citation • Compliance with funder mandates (ARC & NHMRC) ARC and NHMRC OA policy ARC and NHMRC OA policies require that any research outputs arising from a supported research project must be made openly accessible within a twelve month period from the date of publication. http://www.arc.gov.au/arc-open-access- policy https://nhmrc.gov.au/about- us/publications/open-access-policy Why else? • To support the University’s strategic goal to be a global leader in internationally renowned research by communicating high quality, freely available UWA research publications to a broad wide audience • Supports the University’s Excellence in Research Australia (ERA) submission • Complies with the University Policy on: Code of Conduct for the Responsible Practice of Research Escalating costs of publishing Australian university: book and journal expenditure 2009 ‐ 2016 $400 1.2 $350 1.0 0.995 1.039 1.045 0.887 $300 0.915 0.815 0.8 $250 0.709 $200 0.647 0.6 $150 Millions 0.4 $100 0.2 $50 $0 0.0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Expenditure: Serials Expenditure: Non‐Serials Expenditure: Total Exchange Rate % Publishing models Traditional Gold Open Hybrid Open Access Access Publishing Green Open Access Publishing Publishing • Publish your research • Publish with a gold OA with a “hybrid” publisher • Publish with a “traditional” publisher • Publish with a traditional publisher publisher and.. • Publisher will make your • Some publishers require publication OA • The publication is only the author to pay an • Also deposit a version of available to readers with immediately if you pay Article Processing Charge your published work into an APC access to an (APC) an OA institutional institutional repository or subject- subscription or who based repository • If you choose to not pay have purchased access • The publication is the APC the publication is immediately available only available to readers for all readers to access • You transfer copyright to • Most scholarly publishing with access to an freely publisher, but retain the institutional agreements assign right to disseminate the copyright to the publisher subscription or who • You retain copyright and manuscript via OA have purchased access grant publisher licence to repository publish • UWA discourages paying • An embargo period may fees for Hybrid OA • Reuse rights are guided be imposed by the by Creative Common publisher as outlined in Licenses the publisher/author agreement Can I publish in top journals in my field AND publish Open Access? Yes • There are highly ranked, peer-reviewed gold OA journals • Where a gold OA journal charges an APC, financial assistance or a discount may be available to you at UWA • Many highly ranked journals allow authors to “self-archive” a version of their publication in an OA repository within 12 months – green OA Note: OA publication isn’t compulsory if your preferred publication isn’t in one of the above categories. How to find an OA journal Open Access journal directories: • DOAJ - Directory of Open Access Journals General journal directories which can be filtered to show OA journals in your area: • Ulrichsweb Global Serials • CORE - Connecting Repositories • Open Science Directory • AWOL - The Ancient World Online • Directory of Open Access Scholarly Journals in Education • JURN directory (Arts & Humanities) • Knowledge Unlatched – KU Journals Check the OA Policy of a journal: • Sherpa Romeo Refer to the Open Access Toolkit for more information: • https://guides.library.uwa.edu.au/openaccesstoolkit Free or reduced-cost Open Access publishing options….. Gold OA publication • The publication is immediately available online for all readers to access freely • You may be required to pay an Article Processing Fee (APC) • You retain copyright and you grant publisher licence to publish • Reuse rights are guided by Creative Common Licenses • Example: PloS (Public Library of Science ) journals Assistance for gold OA publication The UWA APC Fund The APC Fund is a safety net option for all UWA academic staff (including adjuncts and honorary appointments) and HDR students who have no other source of funding (such as an ARC or NHMRC grant or internal research funds) to cover the cost. Assistance is to a maximum of $3,500 Application for support will be assessed on the following criteria: • The journal must be on the list of current JIF top 10% gold OA journals that charge an APC. A selection of humanities gold OA journals are also included. • The UWA author is either first or corresponding author • The UWA author has by-lined the University of Western Australia • The author has not previously accessed the APC fund in the current calendar year For more information on the APC Fund, see https://guides.library.uwa.edu.au/openaccesstoolkit/apc-fund Assistance for gold OA publication APC discounts The University Library is a Supporter Member of a number of Open Access (OA) services. UWA researchers can publish in these services at a discount on the standard article processing charge: • BioMed Central – 15% • SpringerOpen - 15% • Chemistry Central - 15% • Nucleic Acid Research – 50% • The Royal Society - 25% • If you submit your article from on Campus, you will be automatically recognised as a UWA author based on the UWA IP range. • If submitting from elsewhere use your UWA email address to confirm your UWA For more details see Open Access Toolkit : Reduced rate OA publishing No cost gold OA publication Consider gold OA journal with no APCs As at January 31, 2018, 71% of journals (7,766 journals) listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) had no APCs (free for authors) Negotiate We recommend that HDR students ask the publisher whether they will waive the Article Processing Charge. Cartoon illustrated by John R. McKiernan http://whyopenresearch.org/gallery Knowledge Unlatched http://www.knowledgeunlatched.org/ Green OA publication • Publish with a “traditional” publisher and… • Then deposit the Author Accepted Manuscript (AAM) into the UWA Research Repository &/or a subject-based repository at no cost • You transfer copyright to publisher, but retain the right to disseminate the manuscript via an OA repository •An embargo period may be imposed by the publisher as outlined in the publisher/author agreement • Example: Lancet Sherpa Romeo You can meet funder mandates with green OA ARC: “Acceptable versions of written/printed Research Outputs. For the purposes of this policy, it is acceptable for either of the following versions of a manuscript, journal article in a peer reviewed journal or refereed conference paper to be made Openly Accessible: • the Post-print or “Author accepted manuscript”, which has been accepted for Publication, and which is made available in the author’s Institutional Repository under an appropriate licence such as those available through the Creative Commons suite of licences (ideally CC-BY) • the Publisher’s Version/PDF, also referred to as the ‘Published version’ or ‘version of record’ (for example, journal version with final pagination and formatting). The publisher’s version is only acceptable if it is fully Openly Accessible, with an appropriate licence such as those available through the Creative Commons suite of licences (ideally CC-BY).” https://www.arc.gov.au/policies-strategies/policy/arc-open-access-policy-version-20171 You can meet funder mandates with green OA NHMRC: “What manuscript versions are acceptable under the NHMRC Open Access Policy? • The author’s accepted manuscript version which is also referred to as ‘postprint’ that has been peer reviewed and accepted for publication is acceptable. • The publisher’s version or ‘version of record’ (VoR) with final pagination and formatting is only acceptable if it meets all legal copyright and licensing requirements relating to open access. • ‘Preprints’ are not acceptable versions under this policy.” https://nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/open-access-policy Author’s Accepted Manuscript Assistance for green OA publication UWA Profiles and Research Repository • Repository staff process ARC and NHMRC funded publications to make them available in the UWA Profiles and Research Repository. They contact the Chief Investigator (CI) for a copy of the Author Accepted Manuscript (AAM) and make it available subject to publisher conditions. If they cannot identify the CI, they contact the first UWA author and the corresponding author • You can assist this process by: Including the UWA by-line, the grant ID and the funding body on the publication. Keeping a copy of the AAM Responding to messages from the Repository • You can add your AAM at anytime to any of your publications in the Repository, regardless of whether they are a product of an ARC or NHMRC funded project http://www.library.uwa.edu.au/repository/support-and-faqs#open • The Repository is indexed by Google, Google Scholar and Trove • Publishing OA via the Repository is free Infrastructure for Open Access @ UWA https://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/ UWA OA policy “5.11 The University supports the principle of Open Access by making publications freely available online within twelve months of publication through the UWA Research Repository. UWA authors are responsible for depositing copies of their publications in accordance with this policy. 5.12 Where legal or contractual obligations make this impossible, an explanatory note is added to the publication information in the Research Repository. UWA authors are encouraged to avoid transferring copyright to the publisher and are asked to ensure that publication contracts allow self-archiving of the Author’s Accepted Manuscript in the UWA Research Repository.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pledging 2019 KU OPEN ACCESS HEROES 2019
    VERSION September 2019 Knowledge Unlatched Making Open Access Work Pledging 2019 KU OPEN ACCESS HEROES 2019 TOP Titles by Usage TOP Subject Areas Tweets and the Streets: Social Media and Contemporary Activism The Learning Econo- by my and the Econom- Paolo Gerbaudo ics of Hope Frankenstein : A New by Edition for Scientists Bengt-Åke Lundvall and Engineers by Jason Scott Robert History Political Sociology Literature Linguistics & Science Languages Philosophy Anthro- Media & Theology & Arts pology Communi- Religion cations # of Supporting Institutions per Region 9 27 Scandinavia 114 UK / Ireland North America 68 10 Germany / Austria / Switzerland BeNeLux 16 Australia / New Zealand www.knowledgeunlatched.org TOP KU Authors (by Region) 40.27% 17.17% 15.19% 4.89% 4.16% 3.33% North America UK / Ireland DACH Australia / NZ BeNeLux Scandinavia TOP 10 Publishers (# of Titles) TOP Institutions (# of Downloads) Pluto Press Liverpool University Press 32 31 1. Freie Universität Berlin 6. University of Oxford Manchester 33 204 Transcript 2. Kings College London 7. University of London University of 36 (SOAS) Michigan Press 3. University of Toronto 8. University of Sydney 56 Duke Peter Lang 38 4. Cambridge University 9. University of Edinburgh Mohr Siebeck Academic Studies 41 52 Press 5. Columbia University 10. University of California, 51 San Diego DeGruyter Sources: OAPEN, JSTOR, Altmetrics, based on 2018 Data © Knowledge Unlatched 2019 Knowledge Unlatched Overview KU Marketplace - Pledging Deadline November 30th Page Page New 1 KU Select 2019 Books
    [Show full text]
  • MAJ 04/2021, Cf. Feuilletage Ci-Dessous
    Recherche d’informations sur Internet (perfectionnement) méthodologie et outils disponibles A. Bouchard 04/2021 Pour commencer Principes Moteurs de recherche Sites internet Bases de données bibliographiques Autres bases de données textuelles Images et multimédia Web social Actualités et temps réel Quelques outils complémentaires Veille automatisée Exercices de synthèse Bibliographie Principes Internet ? web ? • internet • réseau de réseaux • fin des années 1960 • protocole TCP/IP • applications et services divers : courrier électronique (mail), messagerie instantanée (IM), forums de discussion, transfert de fichiers (FTP), pair à pair (P2P), web (www)… • données • utilisateurs : 5,1 MM. dans le monde (Internet World Stats, 2020) • langues : 61 % du contenu en anglais, 2,8 % en français (W3Techs, 2021) • voir également Internet live stats Internet ? web ? • Web • World Wide Web (www) • milieu des années 1990 • ensemble de pages HTML (textes, images, liens…) avec une URL et accessibles avec le protocole HTTP • web visible / web invisible • web invisible ou web profond (deep web) : partie du web non indexée et qui ne peut être trouvée par les moteurs de recherche (pages protégées par un mot de passe, pages générées dynamiquement à la suite d’une requête…), voire dark web (web illégal) : 95 % du total ? • taille • 1,2 MM. de sites (Netcraft) • web indexé : au moins 5,3 milliards de pages (Worldwidewebsize) • taille du web identifié (URL connues) ? web général ? Internet ? web ? Ascodocpsy ConceptArt multimédia, 2010 Les âges du web du web âges Les Méthodologie • DEBUSQUER l’information Différents outils Esprit critique Bookmark organisé URL significative Syntaxe de recherche Questions préalables Utilisation réfléchie Evaluation Règles à respecter d’après Eduscol. Rechercher sur internet Méthodologie 1° définir le sujet (contexte de la recherche et mots-clés) Questions Prendre du temps au départ pour en gagner par la suite..
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping the Future of Scholarly Publishing
    THE OPEN SCIENCE INITIATIVE WORKING GROUP Mapping the Future of Scholarly Publishing The Open Science Initiative (OSI) is a working group convened by the National Science Communi- cation Institute (nSCI) in October 2014 to discuss the issues regarding improving open access for the betterment of science and to recommend possible solutions. The following document summa- rizes the wide range of issues, perspectives and recommendations from this group’s online conver- sation during November and December 2014 and January 2015. The 112 participants who signed up to participate in this conversation were drawn mostly from the academic, research, and library communities. Most of these 112 were not active in this conversa- tion, but a healthy diversity of key perspectives was still represented. Individual participants may not agree with all of the viewpoints described herein, but participants agree that this document reflects the spirit and content of the conversation. This main body of this document was written by Glenn Hampson and edited by Joyce Ogburn and Laura Ada Emmett. Additional editorial input was provided by many members of the OSI working group. Kathleen Shearer is the author of Annex 5, with editing by Dominque Bambini and Richard Poynder. CC-BY 2015 National Science Communication Institute (nSCI) www.nationalscience.org [email protected] nSCI is a US-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization First edition, January 2015 Final version, April 2015 Recommended citation: Open Science Initiative Working Group, Mapping the Future of Scholarly
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full White Paper
    Open Access White Paper University of Oregon SENATE SUB-COMMITTEE ON OPEN ACCESS I. Executive Summary II. Introduction a. Definition and History of the Open Access Movement b. History of Open Access at the University of Oregon c. The Senate Subcommittee on Open Access at the University of Oregon III. Overview of Current Open Access Trends and Practices a. Open Access Formats b. Advantages and Challenges of the Open Access Approach IV. OA in the Process of Research & Dissemination of Scholarly Works at UO a. A Summary of Current Circumstances b. Moving Towards Transformative Agreements c. Open Access Publishing at UO V. Advancing Open Access at the University of Oregon and Beyond a. Barriers to Moving Forward with OA b. Suggestions for Local Action at UO 1 Executive Summary The state of global scholarly communications has evolved rapidly over the last two decades, as libraries, funders and some publishers have sought to hasten the spread of more open practices for the dissemination of results in scholarly research worldwide. These practices have become collectively known as Open Access (OA), defined as "the free, immediate, online availability of research articles combined with the rights to use these articles fully in the digital environment." The aim of this report — the Open Access White Paper by the Senate Subcommittee on Open Access at the University of Oregon — is to review the factors that have precipitated these recent changes and to explain their relevance for members of the University of Oregon community. Open Access History and Trends Recently, the OA movement has gained momentum as academic institutions around the globe have begun negotiating and signing creative, new agreements with for-profit commercial publishers, and as innovations to the business models for disseminating scholarly research have become more widely adopted.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access in Its Next Phase: from Single Products to Marketplaces
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.18243/eon/2018.11.11.1 Open Access in Its Next Phase: From Single Products to Marketplaces humanities), librarians and publishers have long been chal- By Sven Fund lenged to address issues such as copyright, intellectual Managing Director property, quality, and pricing—for right or wrong. Knowledge Unlatched and fullstopp Consequently, and in order to broaden its reach as a vi- able model, OA needs to strive for more consolidation at some point—and it needs to better communicate its ben- efits to the key stakeholders, these being researchers and authors. Open access (OA) is probably the most significant innovation Marketplaces of the past decades when it comes to business models in scholarly publishing. In less than two decades, it has rapidly The OA development in journal publishing can be characterized moved from the idealistic periphery to a center stage position, in two phases. During first 10 years, startups of pure OA pub- and there is virtually no significant publisher left that does not lishers like the Public Library of Science (PLoS) or Hindawi offer OA as a key element of their publication strategy.The rise flourished alongside hybrid models, which combined sub- of the model has been accompanied by many experiments, scriptions and APCs; Springer’s acquisition of BioMedCentral first for journals, but more lately also for books and data. As a (BMC)in2008markedanimportantstepintheconsolidation consequence, OA today comes in many flavors, from more and maturing of the space. The field has seen a consolidation as simplistic models around article processing charges (APC), yet unprecedented in academic publishing, whereby the top through memberships, to crowd funding by libraries from all three players today control 50% of the market.
    [Show full text]
  • Do You Speak Open Science? Resources and Tips to Learn the Language
    Do You Speak Open Science? Resources and Tips to Learn the Language. Paola Masuzzo1, 2 - ORCID: 0000-0003-3699-1195, Lennart Martens1,2 - ORCID: 0000- 0003-4277-658X Author Affiliation 1 Medical Biotechnology Center, VIB, Ghent, Belgium 2 Department of Biochemistry, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium Abstract The internet era, large-scale computing and storage resources, mobile devices, social media, and their high uptake among different groups of people, have all deeply changed the way knowledge is created, communicated, and further deployed. These advances have enabled a radical transformation of the practice of science, which is now more open, more global and collaborative, and closer to society than ever. Open science has therefore become an increasingly important topic. Moreover, as open science is actively pursued by several high-profile funders and institutions, it has fast become a crucial matter to all researchers. However, because this widespread interest in open science has emerged relatively recently, its definition and implementation are constantly shifting and evolving, sometimes leaving researchers in doubt about how to adopt open science, and which are the best practices to follow. This article therefore aims to be a field guide for scientists who want to perform science in the open, offering resources and tips to make open science happen in the four key areas of data, code, publications and peer-review. The Rationale for Open Science: Standing on the Shoulders of Giants One of the most widely used definitions of open science originates from Michael Nielsen [1]: “Open science is the idea that scientific knowledge of all kinds should be openly shared as early as is practical in the discovery process”.
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Unlatched Proof-Of-Concept Pilot
    A Global Library Consortium Model for Funding Open Access Scholarly Books Full Report on the Proof of Concept Pilot 2014 Lucy Montgomery Curtin University, Australia Abstract This special issue of Cultural Science Journal is devoted to the report of a groundbreaking experiment in re-coordinating global markets for specialist scholarly books and enabling the knowledge commons: the Knowledge Unlatched proof-of-concept pilot. The pilot took place between January 2012 and September 2014. It involved libraries, publishers, authors, readers and research funders in the process of developing and testing a global library consortium model for supporting Open Access books. The experiment established that authors, librarians, publishers and research funding agencies can work together in powerful new ways to enable open access; that doing so is cost effective; and that a global library consortium model has the potential dramatically to widen access to the knowledge and ideas contained in book-length scholarly works. Journal of Cultural Science Vol.7, No 2 (2014): Knowledge Unlatched http://cultural-science.org/journal Knowledge Unlatched: A Global Library Consortium Model for Funding Open Access Scholarly Books Full Report on the Proof of Concept Pilot 2014 Cultural Science Journal ~ http://cultural-science.org/journal ~ ISSN 1836-0416 ~ Vol 7, No. 2, 2014 ~ 1 This report provides information about the Knowledge Unlatched proof-of-concept Pilot, which took place between January 2012 and September 2014. The Pilot involved libraries, publishers, authors, readers and research funders in the process of developing and testing a global library consortium model for supporting Open Access books. 297 libraries from 24 countries shared the cost of ‘unlatching’ 28 newly published Humanities and Social Sciences research titles, provided by 13 well-known scholarly publishers.
    [Show full text]
  • Aggregating Research Papers from Publishers' Systems to Support Text
    Aggregating Research Papers from Publishers’ Systems to Support Text and Data Mining: Deliberate Lack of Interoperability or Not? Petr Knoth, Nancy Pontika The Open University Walton Drive, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom [email protected], [email protected] Abstract In the current technology dominated world, interoperability of systems managed by different organisations is an essential property enabling the provision of services at a global scale. In the Text and Data Mining field (TDM), interoperability of systems offering access to text corpora offers the opportunity of increasing the uptake and impact of TDM applications. The global corpus of all research papers, i.e. the collection of human knowledge so large no one can ever read in their lifetime, represents one of the most exciting opportunities for TDM. Although the Open Access movement, which has been advocating for free availability and reuse rights to TDM from research papers, has achieved some major successes on the legal front, the technical interoperability of systems offering free access to research papers continues to be a challenge. COnnecting REpositories (CORE) (Knoth and Zdrahal, 2012) aggregates the world’s open access full-text scientific manuscripts from repositories, journals and publisher systems. One of the main goals of CORE is to harmonise and pre-process these data to lower the barrier for TDM. In this paper, we report on the preliminary results of an interoperability survey of systems provided by journal publishers, both open access and toll access. This helps us to assess the current level of systems’ interoperability and suggest ways forward. Keywords: Interoperability, publishers, standardisation 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Glossary of Scholarly Communications Terms
    Your Institution’s Logo Here INSTITUTIONAL MOBILIZATION TOOLKIT Glossary of Scholarly Communications Terms Altmetrics What Can I Do? Altmetrics – also known as cybermetrics or webometrics – are non- Be aware that the increasing traditional metrics that are proposed as an alternative to traditional citation cost of journals is outpacing impact metrics. Altmetrics.org, the organization leading the Altmetrics the increase of library movement, proposes to create new metrics that includes social web activity, budgets, putting pressure on such as: your library to do more with Usage, based on the number of downloads less. Peer-review – when a scholar is considered to have be an expert Citations – using traditional methodologies Be open to a conversation with your librarian about Alt-metrics – analyzing links, bookmarks and conversations your scholarly content needs APC in terms of your research and Article Processing Charge. A fee paid by authors to subsidize the processing teaching, in an environment and publishing costs for open access journals. where tough content retention decisions may have Berlin Declaration on Open Access to be made. The publication of the “Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities” on 22 October 2003 and the subsequent What Are annual conferences heralded the introduction of a process that heightened Libraries Doing? awareness around the theme of accessibility to scientific information. 2013 Working through consortia to marked the tenth anniversary of the publication of the Berlin Declaration. leverage greater purchasing Berlin 12 was held in December 2015 with a focus on the transformation of power. subscription journals to Open Access. Tools: Big Deal Introduction First initiated by Academic Press in 1996, the Big Deal is a structure in which Evolution of Journal a commercial scholarly publisher sells their content as a large bundle, as Pricing opposed to individual journals.
    [Show full text]
  • Exposing Dmps: Use Cases, Workflows and Guidelines
    Exposing DMPs: Use cases, workflows and guidelines Case statement for community review July 2017 Contributors David Carr - The Wellcome Trust John Chodacki, California Digital Library John Faundeen, Earth Resources Observation Center, USGS Bev Jones University of Lincoln Natalie Meyers, Centre for Open Science/ University of Notre Dame Paul Millar, DESY Fiona Murphy, MMC Ltd Kathryn Unsworth, Australian National Data Service Angus Whyte, Digital Curation Centre (Editor) Elena Zudilova-Seinstra, Elsevier Working Group Charter A variety of stakeholders are showing growing interest in exposing data management plans (*) to other actors (human/machine) in the research lifecycle, beyond their creator and the funder or institution that mandates their production. Interested stakeholders include researchers themselves, funders, institutions, and a variety of service providers and community organisations including repositories, institutions, journals, publishers, and providers of tools for writing and maintaining plans. Implementation and adoption is currently hampered by two problems: ● A lack of standards for expression and interchange of DMPs ● Insufficient understanding of the needs of users and the benefits and risks of different modes of action This proposed working group will address both of these issues; the issue of a standardised form of expression for DMPs is the concern of the proposed DMP Common Standards Working Group. The group’s output will include a reference model and alternative strategies for exposing plans, to best serve community interests in meeting FAIR principles,1 based on shared experience of ‘early adopters’ in test implementations. It will be supported by work to gauge user needs and motivations for exposing DMPs as well as perceived risks and disbenefits.
    [Show full text]
  • Walking the Plank: How Scholarly Piracy Affects Publishers, Libraries and Their Users
    Walking the Plank: How Scholarly Piracy Affects Publishers, Libraries and Their Users Laurie Morrison, Carol Stephenson, and Elizabeth Yates* Introduction The arrival of technology supporting peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing in scholarly communication has, until -re cently, had minimal impact on libraries. However, threats posed by pirate sites including Library Genesis Project (LibGen) and Sci-Hub are now impacting both library users and library licensing agreements with publishers. Publishers are nervous as they witness their proprietary content leaking out of paywalled systems—not just hundreds of thousands of articles, but millions. Accordingly, publishers are monitoring activities in licensed products very closely for any behavior that they deem suspicious. When a user’s activities cause a publisher to question whether materials are being pirated, the outcomes can vary. Consequences can range from relatively minor inconvenience for blocked users, who must find workarounds to access scholarly content—to the poten- tial for major disruption of a centuries-old proprietary publishing system. This article uses a case study involving a student at Brock University to highlight significant challenges facing libraries and the rights of their users in the current environment of piracy-wary academic publishers. Case Study: Access Denied “I feel like I’m being penalized for my honesty.” That’s how a graduate student at Brock University felt in January 2016, after her legitimate quest to download several hundred articles for a meta-analysis project turned into a protracted—and ultimately unsuccessful—negotiation with the American Psychological Association. Sarah† had downloaded about 20 articles from the PsycINFO database when she received the following screen prompt: The APA PsycNET Terms and Conditions prohibit “Systematic downloading of content, whether done manually or by technological means.” Please contact [email protected] if you are inter- ested in data mining or wish to conduct a systematic review or meta analysis with PsycINFO data.
    [Show full text]
  • Book of Abstracts Ii Contents
    CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication (OAI8) Wednesday, 19 June 2013 - Friday, 21 June 2013 University of Geneva Book of Abstracts ii Contents Altmetrics in the Wild - Alternative Impact Measurement for Scientific Publications . 1 BG1 - Gold OA Infrastructure (Room 1140) .......................... 1 BG2 - Open Annotations (Room 1150) ............................. 1 BG3 - Altmetrics (Room R160) ................................. 2 BG4 - Open Access Policy Developments (Room R170) ................... 2 BG5 - How to make your university into a monograph publisher? (Room 1130) . 2 BG6 - Reusing Open Acces materials - a Wikimedia perspective (Room R150) . 3 BG6 - Using Wikipedia’s popularity to share research .................... 3 CERIF for Datasets (C4D) .................................... 3 COnnecting REpositories (CORE) - the current state of aggregating Open Access content 4 Citation Finder. A tool for enhancing bibliographic research by extracting references from unstructured scholarly works ............................... 4 DML-CZ, Czech Digital Mathematics Library ......................... 4 Empowering Development: Why Open is Right for Development ............. 5 EuDML, the European Digital Mathematics Library ..................... 5 Guidelines towards implementing Open Access policies ................... 6 Humanities Session: OA Research Monographs in HSS: Opportunities & Challenges . 6 Humanities Session: The Humanities in and for the Digital Age .............. 7 Hydra: open, flexible workflows and community for
    [Show full text]