Leveraging the License: Part II

From 2015 to 2017, I served as co-chair of the Bloomington Faculty Council (BFC) Library Committee. The committee worked for two years to pass, by a unanimous vote of the BFC, the IU Bloomington Open Access Policy.

During my time as co-chair, I spoke with dozens of faculty members, including department chairs and administrators, about the policy. In addition to touting the benefits of Open Access, such as more exposure and potential impact for the scholarship of faculty authors achieved by means of free access and long-term preservation, I routinely described the Open Access as ‘symbolic’ and ‘heuristic’.

By symbolic, I wanted to suggest that adoption of the policy would add the moral authority of another large public research university, such as Indiana University – Bloomington, to the list of U.S. colleges and universities who have adopted such policies.

By heuristic, I meant to express my view that the policy would – and now does – provide an impetus for faculty to think about how they might like to be able to reuse their work in other ways that could be professionally beneficial to them, besides simply transferring their copyright to a journal publisher in return for publication of their scholarly articles. Such uses could include freely distributing their publications through their own professional website, via social media, by means of an institutional or discipline-specific Open Access repository, or simply making them available to students in their classes. The IUB Open Access Policy fosters this goal by providing an institutional mechanism for retaining at least some of a faculty member’s copyrights in their scholarly work.

The policy is not a mandate. Faculty are not required to make their work Open Access. Under the policy, each IUB faculty member grants for themselves, at their discretion, the non-exclusive license articulated by the policy, which permits the university to make their scholarly “articles freely and widely available in an open access repository, provided that the articles are not sold, and appropriate attribution is given to authors.” Because authors can only license their work to the university in keeping with the Open Access policy if they retain enough of their rights to do so, the prior license granted in the policy provides leverage for a faculty member to use when negotiating publishing agreements with journal publishers. This is why Open Access policies, like IUB’s, which are modeled on Harvard University’s policy, are also often referred to as rights-retention policies.

While many publishers now have self-archiving policies that are consistent with the requirements of institutional and government-mandated Open Access polices (see http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php), it might still be necessary to negotiate with publishers to achieve those ends. If you choose to negotiate your copyright with your publisher, the following suggested statement can be used to begin the discussion:

“Journal acknowledges that Author retains the right to provide a copy of the final manuscript, upon acceptance for Journal publication or thereafter, for compliance with the Indiana University Open Access Policy and for public archiving in IUScholarWorks as soon as possible after publication by Journal.”

This language can be added to amend a journal publishing agreement. Alternatively, IU provides a suitable form of addendum used in copyright negotiations at Big 10 Academic Alliance (formerly CIC) institutions. SPARC, the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, also offers an author addendum with supporting documentation. Whether you use one of these addenda or not, the license to IUB will have force, unless you complete the opt out process. For information about opting out or obtaining a waiver letter, visit https://openscholarship.indiana.edu/.

A faculty author could have legitimate reasons to elect to opt out of the Open Access policy. One of the most prevalent reasons is the inclusion of third-party intellectual property quoted or included in a scholarly article under license from a copyright owner. Some common examples include an image or a musical excerpt. Licensing such content can be prohibitively expensive if the article is to be published in an Open Access repository. And while it is possible to deposit a faculty author’s final edited version of a scholarly article without any third-party content that exceeds fair use or is covered by a licensing agreement, an author might legitimately be concerned that the value of their article would be undermined by doing so. If an author cannot secure a license to make third-party intellectual property included in their work available with their article in an Open Access repository, they should opt out of the policy when reporting their work in their annual review on DMAI.

For help with author addenda or other intellectual property issues related to the IUB Open Access policy, please refer to the policy FAQ, or email nazapant@indiana.edu.

 

Leveraging the License: Part I

The Scholarly Communication Department attended several orientations and events for new faculty over the last few weeks. During these events, I have had the privilege of chatting informally with a faculty members about IU Bloomington’s new Open Access Policy. Faculty have a lot of questions about how the policy works, what kinds of scholarship the policy applies to, and author processing charges (or APCs).

The question that has been most difficult to explain quickly and effectively in these informal conversations has been about how faculty can “leverage” or utilize the license established by the Open Access policy when negotiating with potential publishers. This post will explain in more detail what “leveraging the license” means and clarify when in the publishing process faculty should attempt to negotiate. This post on leveraging the OA policy license is part one of a two-part series. The second post will explore the OA policy license in more detail, particularly when it concerns utilizing third-party content.

Our new Open Scholarship website includes a detailed FAQ that answers common questions faculty have about the OA policy. One of the questions listed is, “Will I have to negotiate my copyright transfer with my journal publishers?” Our answer is no. The policy maintains faculty agency and empowers them to make the best decision for their research. Faculty can always embargo their article to comply with their selected journal’s policies or opt out of the OA policy for a specific article.

However, we note that in many cases, it is in the faculty member’s best interest to negotiate. Moreover, the license that IUB OA Policy establishes can support faculty efforts to retain their copyright. Under the question about negotiating copyright transfers we state, “The policy operates automatically to give IUScholarWorks a license in any scholarly articles faculty members complete after its adoption… communicate this policy to your publisher and add to any copyright license (or assignment for scholarly articles) an addendum stating that the agreement is subject to this prior license. That way, you will avoid agreeing to give the publisher rights that are inconsistent with the prior license to IUScholarWorks that permits open-access distribution.”

What does this mean in practice? How do you begin to start a conversation with a publisher that has a restrictive publishing agreement? When should you mention the IUB OA Policy and subsequent license? We have created a flowchart to answer these questions:

Open access policy workflow

Flowchart created by Jamie Wittenberg

After your manuscript is complete, you should identify a journal that offers the readership and audience that you are most interested in. If this is an open access journal, once your article is accepted and published you have complied with the OA policy! If this is a closed journal, you will need to determine if your publishing agreement allows self-archiving (or posting an open version of your article in a repository). The Scholarly Communication department is always happy to help faculty review their publishing agreements. If the publishing agreement allows you to share a version of your work, preferably the publisher’s final version (after peer review with typesetting), then you will submit that version to the institutional repository. Archiving the author’s final manuscript will nevertheless meet the OA policy’s requirement. If the journal does not allow self-archiving, it’s time to consider negotiating.

Negotiating with a publisher is both personal and contextual. Your decision to negotiate may be impacted by your level of comfort, goals, co-authors, and the importance of the publication venue. Is this the only venue that makes sense for your article? Does this journal have impressive metrics or important readership? Or are there other publication venues that might accept the article? Is it non-negotiable to you that others have access to your article, regardless of library affiliation or socio-economic status? Asking these questions can help you decide if publisher negotiation is in your best interest. In general, many publishers are familiar with open access policies so starting a conversation about the publishing agreement is not harmful and can help clarify how or if you should continue to negotiate.

After you have reviewed the publishing agreement and you’ve decided that you would like to negotiate, you can contact our Copyright Program Librarian and lawyer, Naz Pantaloni, for guidance. In addition to having expertise in copyright, Naz has worked with several scholars to retain their author rights and is familiar with strategies for negotiating with publishers. Naz will either assist you with preparing an addendum to present to the journal or help you construct a response that includes information about the IUB Open Access policy. One addendum template that Naz might help you utilize comes from the Big 10 Academic Alliance (formerly CIC). An example of a response to a publisher in order to start the negotiation process is found on our Open Scholarship Q&A:

“[Journal] acknowledges that [Author] retains the right to provide a copy of the final manuscript, upon acceptance for [Journal] publication or thereafter, for compliance with the Indiana University Open Access Policy and for public archiving in IUScholarWorks as soon as possible after publication by [Journal].”

If you cannot come to an understanding with your publisher and need to sign over the exclusive rights to your work, you must complete the opt out process.

In a previous post, I wrote about the spectrum of openness that exists and the Scholarly Communication Department’s goal of supporting all manifestations of open. It is worth stating that the IUB Open Access policy is about making content open and available to readers everywhere. But it is also true the OA policy is about author rights. When authors retain their rights, including the right to reproduce, distribute, display, and make derivative works of their scholarship, they retain the life of their work. I have consulted with many faculty members (and graduate students) that need to interlibrary loan their own work because they don’t have access to it. I’ve worked with numerous faculty that wish they would have retained at least some of their rights so that they could make their work available to their students or share it more broadly. In addition to resources like our copyright program and publishing resources, the OA policy provides a mechanism for faculty to find their seat at the negotiation table. I’m excited for what this means for the research profile of IU Bloomington.

New Resource to Support Open Scholarship

The Scholarly Communication Department recently launched a new Open Scholarship website. The site serves as a central hub for researchers interested in open access, open data, and/or open publishing. The site is particularly useful for finding information about how faculty can comply with the recently-approved IUB Open Access Policy. The Open Access Policy will provide a mechanism for faculty to assert their rights as authors, enabling them to share their scholarship more widely and increasing readership and engagement of IU-faculty work.

The launch of our open scholarship site begs the question, “what is open scholarship?” More pointedly, what qualifies as “scholarship” and how “open” does that output need to be? We think that our site presents a definite answer. We believe that the term scholarship should be inclusive of all of the ways that scholars communicate: through journal articles and books but also through sharing their research data, making visible their learning objects and teaching materials, and even creating new and innovative publications to fill a distinct gap in a body of literature. The new site illustrates that we as the Scholarly Communication Department support scholarship in all of its modes and formats, formal and informal.

Similarly, while open is a core value and essential principle of our work, we recognize that there is an entire spectrum of openness. The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) and the Public Library of Science (PLoS) recently collaboratively authored a “How Open Is It?” spectrum, which helps illustrate this point.

They break open down to reader rights, reuse rights, copyrights, author posting rights, automatic posting, and machine readability. For each, they note the spectrum of open to closed that can exist, which illustrates just how complex and contextual open is. For example, there might be an “open” article that is accessible to readers, but the author wasn’t able to retain all rights to the article and it isn’t in a format that is machine readable. Or, alternatively, an author might retain their copyright and make their work their open but only with strict and limited reuse permissions. The Scholarly Communication Department’s goal is to support all manifestations of openness, regardless of where researchers fall on this spectrum.

Our new website showcases the many services and resources our department offers to facilitate open scholarship. In addition to managing IUScholarWorks and providing faculty a space to make their work open, we provide one-on-one consultations to researchers interested in a variety of topics including advocating for their author rights, evaluating their impact, crafting a data management plan, or starting or making open a journal. We work collaboratively with other library and campus units, including the Indiana University Press, Digital Collections Services, and UITS, to assist researchers with digital scholarship, publishing ventures, and data storage. We look forward to continuing to enhance and develop our suite of services to better support the IU research community.

We’re interested in your feedback! Please send questions and comments about the new Open Scholarship website to iusw@indiana.edu

The Scholarly Communication Department would like to thank the Discovery and User Experience Department, specifically Matt Fitzwater and Courtney McDonald, for their assistance and expertise throughout the development of this site.

The Office of Scholarly Publishing Welcomes Newest Version of Open Journal Systems

The IU Office of Scholarly Publishing is working on a lot of exciting projects this summer. One of those projects is planning its rollout of Open Journal Systems (OJS) 3. The Public Knowledge Project announced the release of OJS 3 last summer and they have been continually updating and improving the open source journals publishing software since the upgrade. The latest version of OJS offers more robust functionality and several new features, making it a major enhancement to the platform we currently provide to over 30 journals. We hope to migrate all of our journals to OJS 3 by spring 2018.

We believe that the new upgrade will make editors’ work more straightforward and will streamline the editorial processes from article submission through final publication. In addition to offering a more flexible interface for customizing each journal’s homepage, OJS 3 enables editors to easily tailor the editorial workflow to their journal’s specific needs and processes. OJS 3 was developed after extensive usability testing with both authors and editors and, as a result, the new system provides more flexible permissions and less restrictive author registration requirements.

OJS 3 will also include a plugin gallery, with new and updated plugins to improve our assessment of journals and DOI registration process. One of the most exciting plugins that OJS 3 will offer is Open Typesetting Stack (OTS). OTS will enable editors to publish their journals in full-text HTML as well as PDF. The plugin will make each journal’s born-digital content more readily accessible to all readers while enhancing the archiving and preservation of its content. We are excited about this new functionality, as it will enable us to integrate multimedia, 3D objects, and other innovative forms of scholarship into our publications.

We recognize that our editors will need personalized support as they learn to use and customize OJS 3 to fit their editorial needs. We plan to meet with each journal individually before next spring to discuss the migration timeline in depth and provide each editorial team with one-on-one training. We are committed to making sure that all content is migrated correctly and efficiently. In addition, we plan to customize PKP’s extensive documentation to our specific OJS instance and our editors’ needs.

The Public Knowledge Project has created an OJS 3 demonstration journal for your perusal. We encourage you to explore OJS 3 in more depth and send any questions you may have about the migration or the new platform to iusw@indiana.edu. If you aren’t one of our current editors but are still interested in launching or moving a journal to the new OJS platform, please contact us. The Office of Scholarly Publishing is excited to work with editors on this important update.

Open Access policy adopted by IU Bloomington faculty

The Bloomington Faculty Council unanimously approved an Open Access policy today that ensures that faculty scholarship will be accessible and available to the public for future generations. Open Access means that scholarly articles are regarded as the fruits of research that authors give to the world for the sake of inquiry and knowledge without expectation of payment. Adopting such a policy reduces barriers to research and learning by making research available on the public internet to be downloaded and shared freely, making it possible for scholarship to be more widely read and cited than literature that appears in closed-access, licensed journal databases. The policy can be found at IUB’s VPFAA site and an FAQ has been posted to our website.

The Scholarly Communication staff will be available to help authors deposit their work — usually the final version of an article that has gone through peer review — in IUScholarWorks or another repository for archival purposes. Indeed, as Nazareth Pantaloni, Copyright Librarian for the IU LIbraries, observed: “The Indiana University Libraries are delighted that the Bloomington Faculty Council has joined the over 300 U.S. colleges and universities who have decided to make their faculty’s scholarship more freely available under an Open Access policy. We look forward to working with them to accomplish that goal.” Faculty members may also contact us to opt-out of the policy, a process that will be incorporated into a one-click form once the policy is fully implemented.

The policy adopted today is only the latest step in an ongoing process at IU Bloomington. The BFC adopted one of the first Open Access policies in the country in March of 2004. That policy was actually a resolution in which the BFC decried the rising costs of academic journals and databases — at the time, 70% of a $9.2 million annual budget — and called on the IU Libraries to adopt several strategies in response, including, among other things, “to promote open scholarly communication.” That resolution served as an impetus for the Libraries’ development of IUScholarWorks. Today, IU ScholarWorks hosts nearly 30 Open Access journals, primarily in the humanities and social sciences, and serves as the repository for nearly 8,000 items deposited by IU Bloomington faculty, students, and staff, including data sets, conference proceedings, out-of-print books recovered by faculty from their original publishers, doctoral dissertations from the Jacobs School of Music, Patten Lectures, and a wide array of journal articles, research reports, other scholarly literature, and even creative works of authorship. Current developments include improvements in the repository’s ability to host multimedia content and data.

Open Access policies are intended, in part, to provide an institutional mechanism for faculty authors to assert the retention of at least the minimum rights necessary in order not only to cooperate with their institutional OA policy, but also be able to reuse their work in other ways that could be beneficial to them, such as distributing their work via their own professional website, through social media, or simply to students in their classes.

Resources are available for faculty who are interested in learning more about the impact and implementation of the policy. Please direct questions to iusw@indiana.edu.

Image: CC-BY. Flickr user Open Access Button

How open science helps researchers succeed

open_science_logo_v2

A new peer-reviewed, sweeping assessment of the impact of open science discovers a number of heartening trends and outcomes in open access approaches to research scholarship. The authors look carefully at the past decade of published research on the impact of open access policies and “find significant benefits to researchers relative to more traditional closed practices.”

 

As they write in summary,

The evidence that openly sharing articles, code, and data is beneficial for researchers is strong and building. Each year, more studies are published showing the open citation advantage; more funders announce policies encouraging, mandating, or specifically financing open research; and more employers are recognizing open practices in academic evaluations. In addition, a growing number of tools are making the process of sharing research outputs easier, faster, and more cost-effective. In his 2012 book Open Access, Peter Suber summed it up best: “[OA] increases a work’s visibility, retrievability, audience, usage, and citations, which all convert to career building. For publishing scholars, it would be a bargain even if it were costly, difficult, and time-consuming. But…it’s not costly, not difficult, and not time-consuming.” (Suber, 2012)

McKiernan et al. “How open science helps researchers succeed.” eLife 2016;5:e16800. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.16800 

The article’s bibliography of past studies is alone worth a look. The full article is available in full text form at elifesciences.org by clicking on the DOI in the article citation above.

Shareability vs. open access: A summary of the contention around Elsevier’s new sharing policy

Less than a month after the academic publisher Elsevier’s director of access and policy Dr. Alicia Wise posted the company’s new policies for sharing and hosting academic articles at every stage and on every platform, the Coalition of Open Access Repositories (COAR) countered with a statement backed by more than 2,000 organizations and individuals across the globe criticizing Elsevier for creating a policy that “represents a significant obstacle to the dissemination and use of research knowledge, and creates unnecessary barriers for Elsevier published authors in complying with funders’ open access policies,” which has sparked a very public back-and-forth with Dr. Alicia Wise.

COAR originally criticized Elsevier’s policy for masquerading as one to progress sharing capabilities, but instead working to accomplish the reverse. The policy forces embargoes of up to 48 months on some journals, requires authors to apply a “non-commercial and no derivative works” license for every article deposited into a repository, and applies to “all articles previously published and those published in the future.” The policy requires unacceptably long embargoes with 90% of the 286 journals having at least 12 month embargo period, reduces ‘re-use value’ of each article, and could put currently accessible articles under embargoes. The overall complaint was that the policy is a step in the exact opposite direction of the global movement towards open access, works to hinder any benefit of openly sharing research, and is posed as a solution for a policy that did not previously show any evidence of having a negative impact on publisher subscriptions.

Dr. Wise responded just a day later with a rebuttal that was aimed at clearing the air. The publishing company was “a little surprised that COAR has formed such a negative view and chosen not to feedback their concerns directly to us,” especially after Elsevier “received neutral-to-positive responses from research institutions and the wider research community” since the announcement of their new policy. Throughout the response article, Dr. Wise states that the embargo policies have been in place since or before 2004 when the last “refresh” came about and that the other changes have been made based on feedback by their authors and institutional partners. Many complaints in response to this rebuttal by commenters and COAR surround Elsevier’s lack of transparency about the feedback they received and the company’s use of share as a way to avoid the topic of true open access publishing.

COAR’s reply to Elsevier reiterates all of COAR’s original concerns, cites more evidence of the publishing company’s dance around being truly open access, and offers improvements that Elsevier can make to their policy:

  1. Elsevier should allow all authors to make their “author’s accepted manuscript” openly available immediately upon acceptance through an OA repository or other open access platform.
  2. Elsevier should allow authors to choose the type of open license (from CC-BY to other more restrictive licenses like the CC-BY-NC-ND) they want to attach to the content that they are depositing into an open access platform.
  3. Elsevier should not attempt to dictate author’s practices around individual sharing of articles. Individual sharing of journal articles is already a scholarly norm and is protected by fair use and other copyright exceptions. Elsevier cannot, and should not, dictate practices around individual sharing of articles.

The counter concludes with COAR offering to take Dr. Wise up on her ‘offer’ to meet with the company in order to help the publisher better understand what the research community desires, due to the many misperceptions that Elsevier believes are confusing the research community as to the real meaning of the new policy.

Analytics for IUScholarWorks is now here!

Hi, I am Pallavi Murthy and I will be working for IUScholarWorks under Scholarly Communications as a Graduate Assistant through fall 2013 and spring 2014. This is my first blog and I am very excited to start off my job with multiple duties at hand! Well, let me put it this way- I am very happy to work on something I really love- Data and Analytics!

To say that data analysis is important to business will be an understatement. In fact, no business can survive without analyzing available data. Data analysis is the lifeline of any business. Whether one wants to arrive at some marketing decisions or fine-tune new product launch strategy, data analysis is the key to all the problems. What is the importance of data analysis – instead, one should say what is not important about data analysis. Merely analyzing data isn’t sufficient from the point of view of making a decision. How does one interpret from the analyzed data is more important. Thus, data analysis is not a decision making system, but decision supporting system. Data analysis can offer the following benefits:

  • Structuring the findings from survey research or other means of data collection
  • Break a macro picture into a micro one
  • Acquiring meaningful insights from the dataset
  • Basing critical decisions from the findings
  • Ruling out human bias through proper statistical treatment. [1]

Libraries can use data analysis for many of the same functions that businesses do. My first project for IUScholarWorks was to perform such an analysis on their website.

Said and done, I am using Google Analytics to analyze the Libraries Website, specifically website traffic related to Data Management. I am also analyzing web traffic for Journals under IU Libraries, including JoSoTL and JoTLT, which  the IUScholarWorks team has put a great deal of time and effort into maintaining.

Stacy asked me to review the data management guide so she can better understand which parts of her guide are the most accessed. The Data Management Guide has seen significant improvement since it was created. Describing Data with Metadata ranks highest as the most accessed sup-page under Data Management at IU, followed by Storage and preservation and Funder Requirements and Data Management Plans.

Next, Stacy asked me to run the analytics for Publication and Data Services webpage, so she could understand if people were using that webpage to find their way to IUScholarWorks. The report shows that IUScholarWorks Repository, Journal Publishing and Data Management Services is one of the most popular link on that page.

It is interesting and delighting to know how IUScholarWorks is trying very hard to make scholarly research and journals open access. I feel as important the efforts for making open access is, so important it is to know the whereabouts of the efforts actually reaching to its users. I would like to analyze more and more reports and bring in some valuable data wonder (as I call it!) in my next upcoming blogs.

To know more about IUScholarWorks, Depositing your scholarly research, Publishing an online journal and Archive and increasing availability of your research data visit http://scholarworks.iu.edu/.

For more information contact the IUScholarWorks team.

Sources:  [1]* http://www.migindia.biz/data.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

White House OTSP creates Open Access policy for federal agencies

OTSP Director John Holdren talks to President Obama in this undated White House photo.

One day after we posted big news about dual Open Access bills in the US and Illinois Senates, the Office of Technology and Science Policy issued a policy memorandum that will essentially enact an Open Access policy similar to the NIH Public Access policy for all federal agencies with more than $100 million in their R&D budget. This policy will not only affect publications, but also the data resulting from funded research.

Many in the Open Access advocacy community are celebrating the announcement as proof of the success of the #OAMonday/Access2Research movement and the resulting “We the People” petition, which solicited a positive (if long-overdue) response from Holdren.

Researcher Joe Hourcle, on the RDAP listserv, has distilled the policy into these essential points:

  • Must give a plan in 6 months on how they’re going to improve public access to publications & data
  • Can have an embargo after publication (baseline is 12 months)
  • No charges for access to the article metadata
  • Grants can include costs for data management & access

The Dryad repository blog explores in a bit more detail exactly what this might mean for data sharing and publication.

It remains to be seen how this surprising and groundbreaking new policy will take effect.