[Irtalk] Fwd: [GOAL] Re: Update on statement against Elsevier's new "sharing" policy

Thu Jun 4 20:59:39 SAST 2015

FYI.

*Hilton Gibson*
Ubuntu Linux Systems Administrator
Stellenbosch University Library
http://staff.lib.sun.ac.za/~hgibson/docs/cv/cv.html

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF) <A.Wise at elsevier.com>
Date: 4 June 2015 at 18:42
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Update on statement against Elsevier's new "sharing"
policy
To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal at eprints.org>
Cc: "Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF)" <A.Wise at elsevier.com>

 Hello Everyone –

After a week of listening to, and conversing with, a number of researchers,
librarians, and other stakeholders, we’ve honed in on the following points
that seem to be causing the most confusion and angst. Our responses on each
point are spread across comment threads and listservs, and I felt it might
be helpful to post some key points here:

1.      *Embargoes:* These are neither new, nor unique, to Elsevier.
Publishers require them because an appropriate amount of time is needed for
subscription journals to deliver value to customers before the full-text
becomes available for free.  Confusion has arisen because we haven’t always
enforced our embargos, preferring to work with Institutional Repositories
(IRs) directly to develop institution-specific agreements.  Our new policy
eliminates the need for repositories to have agreements with us.  Instead
we are now communicating our embargoes more clearly.

2.      *Embargo Lengths:* Our embargo periods are typically between 12 and
24 months, with some longer or shorter exceptions.  We are now hearing that
it is the length of our embargo periods that is of concern rather than the
fact of their existence. Generally embargos should be set on a
title-by-title basis by publishers, however we recognize that other
stakeholders seek influence over embargo lengths too and this is
reasonable. We have already been planning a review of our embargo periods
in 2015.  While I cannot pre-judge the outcome of this review, we are very
conscious of the many new funding body policies that have emerged in the
last year with 12 month embargo periods all of which we will factor in.

3.      *Author’s rights to self-archive in their IR:* We have removed the
need for an institution to have an agreement with us before any systematic
posting can take place in its institutional repository.  Authors may share
accepted manuscripts immediately on their personal websites and blogs, and
they can all immediately self-archive in their institutional repository
too.  We have added a new permission for repositories to use these accepted
manuscripts immediately for internal uses and to support private sharing,
and after an embargo period passes then manuscripts can be shared publicly
as well.

4.      *Retrospective Action:* Based on helpful conversations over the
last week we know we need to make it much more clear that we do not expect
IRs and other non-commercial repositories to take retrospective action.

5.      *New IR Services:* We are developing protocols and technology to
help non-commercial sites implement this policy going forward, and have
been piloting tools and services to help automate this – for example tagged
manuscripts and APIs with metadata and other information about articles
published by researchers on your campuses. To register for more information
or to express interest in participating in a pilot, please see this page
<http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/sciencedirect/linking-and-integration/institutional-repository>
.

6.      *More clarity:* Our new sharing and hosting policies are intended
to provide clarity to researchers so that they understand how they can
share their research, including on newer commercial sharing sites, and to
lift the old requirement for IRs to have agreements with us.

I also attach a slide showing the differences between our old and new
policies, and continue to encourage you all to read these for yourselves.
See
http://www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-updates-its-policies-perspectives-and-services-on-article-sharing

We appreciate the feedback we have received, and wish to continue these
discussions.  We look forward to engaging with you – for example at the
upcoming Open Repositories conference and at library conferences such as
ALA.  You can also always email me directly at a.wise at elsevier.com.

With kind wishes,

Alicia

Dr Alicia Wise

Director of Access and Policy

Elsevier I The Boulevard I Langford Lane I Kidlington I Oxford I OX5 1GB

M: +44 (0) 7823 536 826 I E: a.wise at elsevier.com

*Twitter: @wisealic*

*From:* goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] *On
Behalf Of *Kathleen Shearer
*Sent:* Thursday, June 04, 2015 3:54 PM
*To:* Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
*Subject:* [GOAL] Update on statement against Elsevier's new "sharing"
policy

(sorry for the cross-posting)

In the last two weeks, over 1,600 individuals and organizations from 52
countries around the world have signed a statement
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/petition-against-elseviers-sharing-policy/>
opposing Elsevier’s
new article sharing and hosting policy, underscoring that many in the
scholarly community do not support the new policy.

The policy imposes unacceptably long embargo periods for making articles
available, the vast majority of which range from 12 months to 4 years after
publication. It also requires researchers to apply licenses that restrict
the full re-use of articles.

Research funders from around the world are adopting policies that ensure
fast access, use and impact of research outputs. Most of these funders'
require open access to articles within 12 months of publication or less.
Elsevier's policy is in direct opposition to the trend
towards encouraging greater access to and impact of research results.

Since the statement was published on May 20, 2015, public support has
continued to grow, demonstrating the deep, global support for open access
to research outputs.

COAR and SPARC renew our call
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/petition-against-elseviers-sharing-policy/#comment-1394>
for
Elsevier to revise their policy
<http://www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-updates-its-policies-perspectives-and-services-on-article-sharing>
in
order to better align it with the interests of the research community and
broader society.

------------------------------

Elsevier Limited. Registered Office: The Boulevard, Langford Lane,
Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom, Registration No. 1982084,
Registered in England and Wales.

_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL at eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lib.sun.ac.za/pipermail/irtalk/attachments/20150604/fda7b67b/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: What's changed in sharing policy.pptx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation
Size: 2647072 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.lib.sun.ac.za/pipermail/irtalk/attachments/20150604/fda7b67b/attachment-0001.pptx>