Spring 2016 Copyright & Publishing Workshops Are Here!

We are thrilled to announce our lineup of Copyright & Publishing workshops for Spring 2016. Join the Scholarly Communication team and our colleagues in the Libraries, the IU Press, and the Office of the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education to learn about copyright for visual artists, creating a research poster, scholarly metrics, and more!

Schedule of copyright and publishing workshops

Scholarly Communication Consultation Schedule for Spring 2016

This spring staff members from the Scholarly Communication department will once again be holding consultation sessions in the Scholars’ Commons. Naz will hold consultation hours once a week for issues related to copyright and intellectual property. And once per month, Shayna and Richard will be available to answer questions about using the IUScholarWorks institutional repository and the Open Journal System. Our hours for the Spring semester are as follows:

Copyright Information Services
Presented by Naz Pantaloni​
Friday, 10:00 am – 12:00 pm in room 157R

Open Access Publishing
Presented by Shayna Pekala & Richard Higgins
Second Thursday of each month, 2:00 pm – 3:00pm in room 157R
Jan 14, Feb 11, Mar 10, Apr 14

The Scholars Commons is located on the first floor of the East Tower at the Herman B Wells Library. These are drop-in hours, so no appointment is necessary.

Open Access Week 2015

It’s that time of year again!  On October 19th-23rd, IU Bloomington will celebrate Open Access Week 2015.  Open Access Week is a great opportunity for students, faculty, and librarians to learn more about the potential benefits of open access scholarship and research.  In lieu of this year’s theme, “Open for Collaboration,” IU Bloomington has put together a great series of workshops with speakers from the Office of the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education, The Indiana University Journal of Undergraduate Research, Indiana University Press, and the IU Libraries.  Topics of discussion will include data management, academic publishing for early-career researchers, journal publishing agreements, and more.  All are encouraged to attend and learn from each other!

See below for a detailed list of workshops to be held during Open Access Week 2015:

Monday, October 19, 2015 | Scholar’s Commons IQ Wall (Wells E157H) | 12pm-1pm
Research and Publishing Opportunities for Undergraduates

  • Jane Rogan, Office of the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education
  • Song Kim and Benjamin Cummins, The Indiana University Journal of Undergraduate Research
  • Anne Prieto, Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences

Tuesday, October 20, 2015 | Wells W144 | 3pm-4pm
Open Lab: IUScholarWorks

  • Shayna Pekala and Richard Higgins, Indiana University Libraries

Wednesday, October 21, 2015 | Wells E159 | 3pm-4pm
What You Need to Know Before Signing a Journal Publishing Agreement

  • Nazareth Pantaloni, Indiana University Libraries

Thursday, October 22, 2015 | Wells E159 | 12pm-1pm
Getting Published: Advice from Editors for Early-Career Researchers (Lunch included)

  • Dee Mortensen, Indiana University Press
  • Moira Marsh, Indiana University Libraries

 Friday, October 23, 2015 | Wells E158 | 11am-1pm
Data Management 101 (Lunch included)

  • Heather Coates, Michelle Dalmau, and Jennifer Laherty, Indiana University Libraries
  • Tassie Gniady and Sofia McDowell, Office of Research Compliance
  • Kristy Kallback-Rose, UITS Research Technologies
  • Jennifer Guiliano, Department of History, IUPUI
  • Kalani Craig, Department of History, IUB

Fall 2015 Academic Publishing Workshop Series

The Office of Scholarly Publishing will be hosting a series of Academic Publishing workshops this fall semester.  Topics of discussion will include how to navigate the world of academic publishing, book proposal writing, journal publishing agreements, and preparing a scholarly journal.  Faculty and students planning to publish their research are encouraged to attend!

You may sign up for any of the following workshops and view the complete schedule, including abstracts at http://iub.libcal.com/

Here is the list of workshops being offered:

Monday, September 28, 2015 | Hazelbaker Hall (Wells E159) | 1:00pm-2:00pm
How to Write a Book Proposal

  • Dee Mortensen, Indiana University Press

Monday, October 5, 2015 | Hazelbaker Hall (Wells E159) | 1pm-2pm
How to Start a Scholarly Journal

  • Shayna Pekala, Indiana University Libraries
  • Michael Regoli, Indiana University Press

Monday, October 19, 2015 | Scholar’s Commons IQ-Wall (Wells E157H) | 12pm-1pm
Research and Publishing Opportunities for Undergraduates

  • Jane Rogan, Office of the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education
  • Song Kim and Benjamin Cummins, Indiana University Journal of Undergraduate Research
  • Anne Prieto, Psychological & Brain Sciences Faculty

Wednesday, October 21, 2015 | Hazelbaker Hall (Wells E159) | 3pm-4pm
What You need to Know Before Signing a Journal Publishing Agreement

  • Nazareth Pantaloni, Indiana University Libraries

Thursday, October 22, 2015 | Hazelbaker Hall (Wells E159) | 12pm-1:30pm
Getting Published: Advice from Editors for Early-Career Researchers (Lunch included)

  • Dee Mortensen, Indiana University Press
  • Moira Marsh, Indiana University Libraries

Wednesday, October 28, 2015 | Hazelbaker Hall (Wells E159) | 10:30am-12:00pm
Copyright, Fair Use, and Permissions (for Journal Editors)

  • Nazareth Pantaloni, Indiana University Libraries

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.

Workshop recap: Should I embargo my dissertation?

Last week, The IU Scholars’ Commons sponsored a workshop on the hotly contested topic of whether or not soon-to-be PhD’s should embargo their dissertations. Attendees learned the many ways that this seemingly minor decision may have significant implications for their academic careers. The workshop brought together panelists representing a variety of stakeholder groups to share their viewpoints, which are summarized below.

Image 1: Photo of panelists for “Should I Embargo My Dissertation?”
Celestina introduces the panelists for the workshop, “Should I embargo my dissertation?”

Introduction

At Indiana University, graduate students are required to submit their dissertations to ProQuest, a commercial database provider, where they have a choice of two publishing options: Traditional or Open Access. With the Traditional Publishing option, only those with access to ProQuest through a library subscription or who purchase an individual copy of the dissertation will be able to view the full text. With the Open Access Publishing option, anyone with an internet connection will be able to read the entire dissertation. To avoid the $95 fee for Open Access Publishing in ProQuest, students can submit their dissertations to IUScholarWorks, a free service provided by the IU Libraries.* In addition to choosing between Traditional and Open Access Publishing, students may also select an embargo length of up to two years (or more, with special permission from the Graduate School). Placing an embargo on a dissertation means that no one in the world will be able to able to view its contents for the specified length of time. So, to embargo or not to embargo?

*Submitting to IUScholarWorks alone does not fulfill the requirements for graduation; the dissertation must also be submitted to ProQuest. Students who wish to make their dissertation Open Access are advised to select the Traditional Publishing option in ProQuest and then submit to IUScholarWorks. Learn how at https://scholarworks.iu.edu/deposit.

Reasons to embargo

  • Your dissertation contains patentable intellectual property for which you have not yet received a certificate.
    • While you automatically own the copyright to your dissertation upon its creation, copyright only protects the fixed expression of your work as a whole, NOT any of the ideas or facts presented within it.
  • You want to avoid getting “scooped.”
  • Your dissertation contains sensitive data.
  • Your dissertation contains work that is still in copyright that belongs to a third-party who has not given permission to redistribute it and your use in the dissertation is not a fair use.
  • A publisher is interested in turning your dissertation into a book and has expressly told you they will not do so if the dissertation is available online. Read more about future publication concerns.

Reasons not to embargo

  • The more accessible your dissertation is, the more likely it is to be cited.
  • Making your dissertation accessible allows it to be scrutinized by others in the field, promoting collegiality.
  • You don’t want to be plagiarized.
    • If you’re worried about copyright infringement and/or plagiarism, then you should get your idea out there as soon as possible so that it’s publicly documented and accessible. That way, you have proof that the idea originated from you and that the alleged infringer had access to your work. While copyright protection is automatic, people who are concerned about copyright infringement can also register a copyright in it with the U.S. Copyright Office. ProQuest will do this for you for an additional fee of $55, or you can do it yourself for $35 at http://copyright.gov/eco/. Registration provides statutory damages and attorneys’ fees in the event of infringement.
  • Having dissertations available helps teach future scholars about the process of scholarship.
  • You do not intend to pursue a tenure-track position.

A note about future publication

Many students and their advisors have unfounded fears that publishers will not publish a book that is based on a dissertation, yet there are no facts to support this. When a dissertation goes through the publication process, at least 50% of the information changes in some shape or form. Dee Mortensen, Senior Sponsoring Editor at the IU Press, compares the relationship between a dissertation and a book to that of a chrysalis and a butterfly. Furthermore, Ellen McKay, Associate Professor of English, relates that faculty are now expected to be able to statistically describe the difference between their dissertation and book, and less than a 50% difference is considered an insufficiently edited work. Because of the substantial alteration involved in the transformation of book to dissertation, there is no commercial disadvantage in having the original dissertation available. The study “Do Open Access Electronic Theses and Dissertations Diminish Publishing Opportunities in the Social Sciences and Humanities?” supports this claim, finding that most publishers (93% of university presses) do not consider an ETD a prior publication that would completely disqualify the revised version from publication.

Final thoughts

Deciding whether or not to embargo your dissertation is an extremely personal decision that should not be taken lightly. In the end, the question really comes down to what you want to do with your dissertation. Many of the reasons to embargo assume that the author intends to turn it into a book to fulfill the requirements of tenure and promotion. If this is not your intention, then by all means free your dissertation and let it be unembargoed. The topic of dissertation embargoes also brings into question whether the current system of tenure and promotion should place so much value on the book, when new technologies afford alternative possibilities that permit broader and more efficient knowledge dissemination.

A big thank you to all of the panelists: Judith Allen (Professor, Department of History), Ellen McKay (Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies, Department of English), Dee Mortensen (Senior Sponsoring Editor, IU Press) Nazareth Pantaloni (Copyright Librarian, IU Libraries), and Shayna Pekala (Open Access Publishing Manager, IU Libraries). Thank you also to Shelly-Gerber Sparks and Celestina Savonius-Wroth for their contributions to the event.

OA Week 2014 Wrap-Up

On October 20-24th, IU Bloomington celebrated Open Access Week 2014 with a series of workshops and events to increase the local research community’s understanding of open access. Moira Marsh and Dee Mortensen kicked off the week with a session on the “Road to Publishing for Students,” where they relayed the steps in the publishing process and shared tips on how to (and how not to) get published.

Tuesday’s events began with a student roundtable discussion on open access moderated by ILS professor Cassidy Sugimoto. The four student panelists shared their thoughts on a variety of issues in open access, including types of OA, quality control, activism, power dynamics of publishers, disciplinary differences, and more. In the afternoon, Nicholas Wyant, Theresa Quill, and Christina Sheley showcased three different tools for finding open access resources in the social sciences: SSRN, American Fact Finder, and Open Street Map.

Shayna Pekala led a workshop on Wednesday morning introducing Open Journal Systems (OJS) software as a tool for publishing your open access journal. Jen Laherty followed on Thursday afternoon with an informative workshop on how to write a data management plan for an NSF grant proposal (for those of you who missed it, a recording is available here). She also explained the various options for storing data at IU and where to go for help with managing your data.

Naz Pantaloni gears up for his presentation on journal publishing agreements.
Naz Pantaloni gears up for his presentation on journal publishing agreements.

Naz Pantaloni wrapped the week up with a session on negotiating journal publishing agreements. He talked about the basics of copyright, what rights are typically negotiable, and how authors can use an Author Addendum to maximize their rights.

Overall it was a successful week with ample learning opportunities for students and faculty alike. A big thank you to all of the presenters, the Scholars’ Commons, and the Libraries for making these events possible!

When Can I Deposit What? Everything You Need to Know about Permissions and Versions When Submitting to the Repository

Every time you submit an item to the IUScholarWorks repository, you must accept the IUScholarWorks License. By accepting our non-exclusive license, you acknowledge that you either own the copyright to the work you are depositing, or you have been granted permission by the copyright holder to deposit it. If you are depositing material that has already been published, you will first need to find out if you hold the copyright.

When you publish an article in a journal, copyright is typically transferred to the publisher (this will be indicated in your original publishing agreement). If the publisher owns the copyright to your work, you will need to check whether they allow you to deposit it in the institutional repository. Fortunately, most publishers have developed explicit policies that speak to this, so you often won’t need to contact them directly. You can search for a publisher’s copyright policy on their website, or use the Sherpa/Romeo database.

When publishers do allow you to deposit your work in an institutional repository, they frequently impose restrictions, such as an embargo period and/or the type of version permitted.

Embargoes

Publisher embargo periods can range anywhere from 6 to 24 months (and sometimes longer). If a publisher requires you to embargo your work, you can still deposit it in the institutional repository now and designate the amount of time after which it can be made openly available.

Version types

There are three types of versions that a publisher may or may not allow you to submit to the institutional repository:

Pre-print – a draft of an article before peer review

Post-print – the final, peer-reviewed article submitted for publication

Publisher PDF – the final, peer-reviewed article in the publisher’s typesetting and formatting

It’s important to note that content-wise, the post-print and the publisher PDF versions are identical. Many more publishers allow authors to deposit the post-print version in the repository than they do the publisher PDF version.

If you are ever unsure about what work you can or can’t deposit, please contact the IUScholarWorks Team.

IUScholarWorks Journals Now Minting DOIs

An example of an article with a DOI in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
An example of an article with a DOI in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.

IUScholarWorks is pleased to announce that we are now offering the ability to mint DOIs for IUScholarWorks journal content in partnership with CrossRef.

A DOI, or Digital Object Identifier, is a string of characters that uniquely identifies an online item and serves as a stable, permanent URL. This functionality makes it easier for online content to be discovered, used, and cited.

As part of IUScholarWorks’s agreement with CrossRef, journals that use this service are required to check for and include existing DOIs for all article citations. Therefore, we encourage journals with back content to issue DOIs only for prospective content (if your needs extend beyond this, please contact us).

Within OJS, the DOI plugin allows journal managers to configure the journal’s DOI settings, and the CrossRef XML Export plugin enables them to export metadata for deposit into the CrossRef database. Additionally, editors have the ability to add DOIs to article PDFs prior to publication.

To start issuing DOIs for your IUScholarWorks journal, please contact us at iusw@indiana.edu. Detailed instructions are also available on the IUScholarWorks wiki.

Predatory Publishers and IUScholarWorks

My name is Brianna Marshall and I am the Scientific Data Curation Assistant in the Scholarly Communication Department. While my responsibilities primarily pertain to helping researchers manage their data, I also work with IUScholarWorks (IUSW) quite frequently. Making your work available in IUSW ensures that it is preserved and made available to researchers around the world. Unfortunately, individuals submitting work to IUSW and other institutional repositories may find themselves targeted by predatory open access publishers.

What is a predatory publisher?

Often, predatory publishers do not offer traditional editorial services, such as peer review (although they may claim that they do). Many of these journals will accept an article then let the author know that they owe an exorbitant publication fee.

These predatory publishers can seem legitimate – they may have fully functional websites and authors rights statements that are similar to those of well-respected publishers, but this is no guarantee of their quality. The rise of online publishing has made it easier for these groups to masquerade as legitimate publishers.

How can I identify a predatory publisher?

Predatory publishers don’t serve any risk to researchers if you can identify and discount them as an option for disseminating your work.

Predatory publishers are seeking to make a large profit, so they are known to aggressively seek out new authors or editors. Receiving a form email that requests your submission to a particular publisher should be your first clue. Some publishers are bold enough to find authors who have submitted to institutional repositories: a librarian within our department experienced this firsthand after submitting her work into IUSW.

Don’t be fooled by these publishers. If you have any suspicions about the publisher, we recommend that you consult Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers. Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado-Denver, publishes a list of “potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers” on his website. If after consulting his list you still have questions or concerns, consult your local librarian.

How can I avoid unwanted reuse of my work?

Clearly licensing your work with a non-commercial Creative Commons license is a possible way to thwart unwanted reuse of your work, but it’s not fool-proof. The rise of predatory publishers means that scholars need to be more vigilant than ever about researching where they choose to publish and what rights they have over that work.