[LINK] Harvard arts-science requires open-access publishing

[Roger Clarke]

At 13:21 +1100 15/2/08, Robin Whittle wrote:
>Item 5 of:
>    http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~secfas/February_2008_Agenda.pdf
>requires all papers from the Faculty of Arts and Sciences to be
>published in open-access journals.

My reaction yesterday, posted to some ANU colleagues, was:

>First MIT now Harvard does the bleeding obvious, a long time after 
>everyone else;  and the media - even the NYT - swallow it, and give 
>them undue cred!
>
>(Yes, it probably does help the momentum of open content a bit).


Of possibly greater significance is this one:

>University of British Columbia unveils online institutional repository -
>11 Feb 2008
>
>The University of British Columbia (UBC) has announced the development
>of an institutional repository (IR). Called cIRcle (circle.ubc.ca), the
>online storehouse is designed to help store the vast array of UBC's
>research output. Currently in pilot mode, cIRcle will be officially
>launched in spring 2008.
>
>Based on an open access model, cIRcle is a digital archive of the
>university's intellectual output including peer-reviewed research,
>teaching and learning materials, and administrative items. Embargoes may
>be placed on certain types of material depending on aspects such as
>publication dates and publisher permissions, but access for all has been
>made an underlying concept.
>
>cIRcle contributors will not assign their copyright to the IR. Instead,
>they will give cIRcle a non-exclusive licence to make their work openly
>available. Authors retain the moral rights in their works, so they are
>required to be properly attributed and cited when used by others.
>
>Two communities - the Faculty of Graduate Studies and UBC Library - have
>already begun to submit work to the site. A content recruitment group
>has been mandated to introduce cIRcle to other departments across the
>UBC campus.


My comments on that one were:

I've commented quite a few times about:
(1)  the need for the term 'institutional repository' to be used very
      carefully, to include both university and professional repositories
(2)  the inherent tensions between university and professional repositories

I've also suggested that the game could get rather nasty, as 
universities seek to leverage off the expertise of their 
staff-members, which for the small-minded among them will mean 
restrictive use of copyright, and constraints on publication.

UBC's cIRcle appears to be a very *good* form of institutional 
repository, because it's conceived as being open (and deferred-open 
only when necessary and only for a brief time);  and it seeks a 
licence rather than assignment of copyright.

But it appears to blithely assume that its staff won't publish in 
journals that demand assignment of copyright and provide a limited 
licence back, or none at all.

Perhaps UBC are accompanying the announcement with an exhortation to 
its staff to choose their publishing venues carefully, and avoid 
signing their rights away.


-- 
Roger Clarke                  http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/

Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd      78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
                    Tel: +61 2 6288 1472, and 6288 6916
mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au                http://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in Info Science & Eng  Australian National University
Visiting Professor in the eCommerce Program      University of Hong Kong
Visiting Professor in the Cyberspace Law & Policy Centre      Uni of NSW