[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

# [drf:3726] Re: 適当訳　A CHORUS of Boos: Publishers Offer Their 'Solution' to Public Access

- Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:31:58 +0900

    皆様
    さらなる出版社側の巻き返しの動きとして、Emeraldという出版社が2年間の
    エンバーゴを設定したという話と、Springer社がやはり1年のエンバーゴを
    設定したというニュースが流れてきましたね。
    ハーナッド等が心配していたRCUKポリシーの副作用がいよいよ現れてきたと
    いうことでしょうか。
    The Empire Strikes Back!　（古い(^^;)?

    　　　栗山　正光
    　　　常磐大学人間科学部現代社会学科
    　　　〒310-8585 水戸市見和1-430-1

    ＃ああっ、原稿の締切が。。。

    -------- Original Message --------
    Subject: [GOAL] Re: Is Green Open Access in the process of fading away?
    Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 21:42:26 +0200
    From: didier.pelaprat ＠ xxxxxxxxx
    Reply-To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) <goal ＠ xxxxxxxxxxx>
    To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) <goal ＠ xxxxxxxxxxx>,        Heather Morrison <hgmorris ＠ xxxxxx>
    CC: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) <goal ＠ xxxxxxxxxxx>,        SPARC Open Access Forum <SPARC-OAForum ＠ xxxxxxx>

    Hello,

    Many thanks to all of you.
    You are probably aware of that:

    Springer, which defined itself some months ago as a "green publisher"
    in a advertisement meeting they invited us(they call that
    "information" meeting) and did not ask any embargo for institutional
    open repositories (there was only an embargo for the repositories of
    funders with a mandate), now changed its policy (they call that a "new
    wording") with a 12-month embargo for all Open repositories.

    It is now displayed in Sherpa/Romeo.

    I was sais that this new policy was settled "in reaction to the US,
    Europe and RCUK policy".

    I figured out that this would make some "buzz", but for the moment I
    did not see any reaction. Did you hear from one?

    Best regards
    Didier Pélaprat

    Heather Morrison <hgmorris ＠ xxxxxx> a écrit :

>     Thanks for the alert, Richard.

>     Would the Compact on Open Access Publishing Equity would consider
>     making a statement / recommendation concerning this practice? My
>     suggestion is that this is incompatible with COPE's commitment to
>     establish "durable mechanisms for underwriting reasonable
>     publication charges" as it will force scholars to pay APCs where
>     before green open access would have sufficed. For this reason, I
>     think it would be reasonable for COPE members to refuse to pay open
>     access APCs for any publisher implementing such a policy (extending
>     green open access embargoes for scholarly works covered by an open
>     access mandate).

>     my two bits,

>     Heather Morrison

>     For my call for librarians to withdraw their work as editors,
>     authors, and reviewers from Emerald in light of this practice, see
>     my blogpost LIS Publisher Emerald: profit, not knowledge-sharing?
>     http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.ca/2013/06/lis-publisher-emerald-profit-not.html

>     On 2013-06-17, at 5:48 AM, Richard Poynder wrote:

> >     When last July Research Councils UK (RCUK) announced its new Open
> >     Access (OA) policy it sparked considerable controversy, not least
> >     because the policy required researchers to "prefer" Gold OA (OA
> >     publishing) over Green OA (self-archiving). The controversy was
> >     such that earlier this year the House of Lords Science & Technology
> >      Committee launched an inquiry into the implementation of the
> >     policy  and the subsequent report was highly critical of RCUK.

> >     As a result of the criticism, RCUK published two clarifications.
> >     Amongst other things, this has seen Green OA reinstated as a viable
> >      alternative to Gold. At the same time, however, RCUK extended the
> >     permissible maximum embargo before papers can be self-archived from
> >      12 to 24 months. OA advocates -- who maintain that a six-month
> >     embargo is entirely adequate -- responded by arguing that this
> >     would simply encourage publishers who did not have an embargo to
> >     introduce one, and those that did have one to lengthen it. As a
> >     result, they added, many research papers would be kept behind
> >     publishers' paywalls unnecessarily.

> >     It has begun to appear that these warnings may have been right.
> >     Evidence that publishers have indeed begun to respond to RCUK's
> >     policy in this way was presented during a second inquiry into OA --
> >      this time by the House of Commons Business, Innovation & Skills
> >     (BIS) Committee. The Committee cited the case of a UK publisher who
> >      recently introduced a 24-month embargo where previously it did not
> >      have one. The publisher was not named, but it turns out to be a
> >     UK-based company called Emerald.

> >     Why did Emerald decide that an embargo is now necessary where
> >     previously it was not? Why do the details of the embargo on
> >     Emerald's web site differ from the details sent to the publisher's
> >     journal editors? And what does Emerald's decision to introduce a
> >     two-year embargo presage for the development of Open Access? To my
> >     surprise, obtaining answers to the first two questions proved more
> >     difficult than I had anticipated.

> >     More here:
> >     http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/open-access-emeralds-green-starts-to.html

> >     _______________________________________________
> >     GOAL mailing list
> >     GOAL ＠ xxxxxxxxxxx
> >     http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

    (2013/06/18 8:57), 加藤 信哉 wrote:

>     みなさま

>     鈴木さんの訳文を手直ししました。ご参考までに送付します。

>     加藤信哉（筑波大学附属図書館）

>     ------------------------------ここから-------------------------------
>     ブーイングのコーラス：出版社がパブリックアクセスに対する「解決法」を提案
>     マイケル　エイゼン　（2013年6月4日）

>     案の定、購読モデルジャーナルの出版社の連合が、ホワイトハウスの義務化（連
>     邦政府関係機関が助成した研究成果をパブリックアクセスにするシステムを開発
>     し、その実現のため実装を提案すること）に反応した。
>     http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ostp_public_access_memo_2013.pdf

    ──────────────────☆────────
    月刊DRF http://drf.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/gekkandrf/
    　2013年6月号(41号)を発行しました！

    DRF（Digital Repository Federation）
    http://drf.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/drf/
    ─────★─────────────────────

- Follow-Ups:
  - [drf:3728] Re: 適当訳 A CHORUS of Boos: Publishers Offer Their 'Solution' to Public Access
    - From: 鈴木雅子

- References:
  - [drf:3723] 適当訳　A CHORUS of Boos: Publishers Offer Their 'Solution' to Public Access
    - From: Masako Suzuki
  - [drf:3725] Re: 適当訳　A CHORUS of Boos: Publishers Offer Their 'Solution' to Public Access
    - From: 加藤 信哉

- Prev by Date: [drf:3725] Re: 適当訳　A CHORUS of Boos: Publishers Offer Their 'Solution' to Public Access
- Next by Date: [drf:3727] Re: 適当訳　A CHORUS of Boos: Publishers Offer Their 'Solution' to Public Access
- Previous by thread: [drf:3725] Re: 適当訳　A CHORUS of Boos: Publishers Offer Their 'Solution' to Public Access
- Next by thread: [drf:3728] Re: 適当訳 A CHORUS of Boos: Publishers Offer Their 'Solution' to Public Access
- Index(es):
  - Date
  - Thread