Unescaped From at start of line, single-part message

From - Sun Jun 21 21:30:11 2015
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Delivered-To: redactd@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.100.165 with SMTP id s34csp633627qge;
        Wed, 27 May 2015 22:00:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.42.120.66 with SMTP id e2mr7394973icr.37.1432789211714;
        Wed, 27 May 2015 22:00:11 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <owner-LIBLICENSE-L@listserv.crl.edu>
Received: from mail.crl.edu (mail.crl.edu. [209.175.55.103])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x6si13025414igl.33.2015.05.27.22.00.10
        for <redactd@gmail.com>;
        Wed, 27 May 2015 22:00:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of owner-LIBLICENSE-L@listserv.crl.edu designates 209.175.55.103 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.175.55.103;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
       spf=pass (google.com: domain of owner-LIBLICENSE-L@listserv.crl.edu designates 209.175.55.103 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=owner-LIBLICENSE-L@listserv.crl.edu
X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1432789204-0815cc69d4ddd30001-tYDu7y
Received: from mail.crl.edu (crlmail.crldomain.edu [192.168.1.22]) by mail.crl.edu with ESMTP id EPeiidWCrQsqdllI; Thu, 28 May 2015 00:00:04 -0500 (CDT)
X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: owner-LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU
X-ASG-Whitelist: Sender
Received: from LISTSERV (192.168.1.42) by mail.crl.edu (192.168.1.22) with
 Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Thu, 28 May 2015 00:01:21 -0500
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 00:00:00 -0500
Reply-To: LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU>
Sender: LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU>
From: LIBLICENSE-L automatic digest system <LISTSERV@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU>
Subject: LIBLICENSE-L Digest - 26 May 2015 to 27 May 2015 (#2015-98)
To: <LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU>
X-ASG-Orig-Subj: LIBLICENSE-L Digest - 26 May 2015 to 27 May 2015 (#2015-98)
Message-ID: <LIBLICENSE-L%201505280000003140.16CB@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU>
Precedence: list
List-Help: <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU?body=INFO%20LIBLICENSE-L>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:LIBLICENSE-L-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:LIBLICENSE-L-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU>
List-Owner: <mailto:LIBLICENSE-L-request@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Barracuda-Connect: crlmail.crldomain.edu[192.168.1.22]
X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1432789204
X-Barracuda-URL: https://192.168.1.23:4430/cgi-mod/mark.cgi
X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at crl.edu
X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1

There are 5 messages totaling 701 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Joy of Imaginary Data (Re: Global coalition of organizations denounce
     Elsevier's new "sharing" policy)
  2. COAR-recting the record
  3. In Defence of Elsevier
  4. UKSG webinar 9 June - Creative Commons and Education =E2=80=93 are we there yet?
  5. June 17 NISO Virtual Conference: The Eternal To-Do List: Making Ebooks
     work in Libraries

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

Date:    Wed, 27 May 2015 18:42:41 -0400
From:    LIBLICENSE <liblicense@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Joy of Imaginary Data (Re: Global coalition of organizations denounce Elsevier's new "sharing" policy)

From: "Bargheer, Margo Friederike" <redactd@sub.uni-goettingen.de>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 06:45:25 +0000

Hi All,

At our research library we cancel journals when budget constraints
(usually caused by raising prices from stock market noted publishers)
force us to do so. The choice we make is based on price plus faculty
use and whether we can actually cancel them. So if journals have a
price worth saving, faculty shows little use and does not object a
cancellation, we'll cancel, if we can.

It might be well the case that there is little use from scholars due
to a high prevalence of easily accessable material caused by green OA.
But if that held true, it would only show that scholars and their
institutions have decided to organise the scholarly communication in
this particular way. If that scholarly choice is in conflict with
publisher's revenue expectations they better adjust their business
model along the needs of scholars and their libraries instead of
tightening their OA policies.
Best
Margo

Electronic Publishing
SUB G=C3=B6ttingen
Margo Bargheer


> Am 27.05.2015 um 05:04 schrieb LIBLICENSE <liblicense@GMAIL.COM>:
>
> From: Rick Anderson <redactd@utah.edu>
> Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 02:12:03 +0000
>
> Thanks very much for this useful response, Christina. One clarification:
>
>> Physics has the highest levels and longest history of green OA. The
>> evidence from physics to date is that high levels of green OA don=C2=B9t
>> cause journal cancellations.
>
> I agree that this is true at the discipline level, but what I=C2=B9m
> particularly interested in is evidence at the journal level, since that=
=C2=B9s
> where subscription and cancellation decisions are made. (You can=C2=B9t c=
ut
> "physics journals," you can only cut particular physics journals.)
>
> So what I=C2=B9m still interested in knowing is whether anyone is aware of
> examples of particular subscription journals most or all of whose content
> is available for free in Green OA versions. (Of course, as Anthony points
> out, the concept of "available" is kind of squishy; if the content is
> technically available but hard to find, that will obviously make it less
> likely that its availability would result in subscription cancellations.)
>
> ---
> Rick Anderson
> Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections
> Marriott Library, University of Utah
> redactd@utah.edu

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

Date:    Wed, 27 May 2015 18:49:01 -0400
From:    LIBLICENSE <liblicense@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: COAR-recting the record

From: Kathleen Shearer <redactd@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 12:38:39 -0400

(sorry for any cross-posting)

In its recently released =E2=80=9CSharing and Hosting Policy FAQ=E2=80=9D, =
Elsevier
=E2=80=9Crecognize(s) that authors want to share and promote their work and
increasingly need to comply with their funding body and institution's open
access policies.=E2=80=9D However there are several aspects of their new po=
licy
that severely limit sharing and open access, in particular the lengthy
embargo periods imposed in most journals- with about 90% of Elsevier
journals having embargo periods of 12 months or greater. This is a
significant rollback from the original 2004 Elsevier policy which required
no embargos for making author=E2=80=99s accepted manuscripts available; and=
 even
with the 2012 policy change requiring embargoes only when authors were
subject to an OA mandate.

With article processing charges (APCs) that can cost as much as $5000 US
dollars for publishing in one of Elsevier=E2=80=99s gold open access titles=
 or
hybrid journals, this is not a viable option for many researchers around
the world. Furthermore, the rationale for lengthy embargo periods is to
protect Elsevier=E2=80=99s subscription revenue. We do not believe that sci=
entific,
economic and social progress should be hindered in order to protect
commercial interests. In addition, there is currently no evidence that
articles made available through OA repositories will lead to cancellations.

Elsevier=E2=80=99s new policy also requires that accepted manuscripts poste=
d in
open access repositories bear a CC-BY-NC-ND license. This type of license
severely limits the re-use potential of publicly funded research. ND
restricts the use of derivatives, yet derivative use is fundamental to the
way in which scholarly research builds on previous findings, for example by
re-using a part of an article (with attribution) in educational material.
Similarly, this license restricts commercial re-use greatly inhibiting the
potential impact of the results of research.

Elsevier=E2=80=99s Director of Access & Policy, Alicia Wise states that the=
y =E2=80=9Chave
received neutral-to-positive responses from research institutions and the
wider research community.=E2=80=9D Yet, since the =E2=80=9CStatement agains=
t Elsevier=E2=80=99s
sharing policy=E2=80=9D was published just one week ago (on Wednesday May 2=
0,
2015), it has been signed by close to 700 organizations and individuals,
demonstrating that there is significant opposition to the policy.

Elsevier has indicated that they =E2=80=9Care always happy to have a dialog=
ue to
discuss these, or any other, issues further.=E2=80=9D  We would like to off=
er the
following concrete recommendations to Elsevier to improve their policy:

Elsevier should allow all authors to make their =E2=80=9Cauthor=E2=80=99s a=
ccepted
manuscript=E2=80=9D openly available immediately upon acceptance through an=
 OA
repository or other open access platform.

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.

Elsevier should not attempt to dictate author=E2=80=99s practices around in=
dividual
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.


We strongly encourage Elsevier to revise their policy in order to better
align with the interests of the research community. We would also be
pleased to meet to discuss these recommendations with Elsevier at any time.

Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director, COAR

Heather Joseph, Executive Director, SPARC


On May 21, 2015, at 7:41 PM, LIBLICENSE <liblicense@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

From: "Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF)" <redactd@elsevier.com>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 15:58:30 +0000

Hello everyone =E2=80=93

Just a quick note to draw your attention to our article, posted today
in Elsevier Connect and in response to yesterday=E2=80=99s statement by COA=
R:

http://www.elsevier.com/connect/coar-recting-the-record.

I=E2=80=99ll also append the full text of this response below.

You might also be interested in this Library Connect webinar on some
of the new institutional repository services we are piloting
(
http://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/articles/2015-01/webinar-institutional-r=
esearch-repositories-characteristics-relationships-and-roles
)
and reading our policies for yourselves:

=C2=B7         Sharing =E2=80=93
http://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-posting-policy

=C2=B7         Hosting - http://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/hosting



With best wishes,

Alicia

*********

COAR-recting the record

We have received neutral-to-positive responses from research
institutions and the wider research community. We are therefore a
little surprised that COAR has formed such a negative view, and chosen
not to feedback their concerns directly to us.  We would like to
correct the misperceptions.

Our sharing policy is more liberal in supporting the dissemination and
use of research:

* At each stage of the publication process authors can share their
research: before submission, from acceptance, upon publication, and
post publication.
In institutional repositories, which no longer require a formal
agreement to host full text content

* Authors can also share on commercial platforms such as social
collaboration networks

* We provide new services to authors such as the share link which
enables authors to post and share a customized link for 50 days free
access to the final published article

* For authors who want free immediate access to their articles, we
continue to give all authors a choice to publish gold open access with
a wide number of open access journals and over 1600 hybrid titles

Unlike the claims in this COAR document, the policy changes are based
on feedback from our authors and institutional partners, they are
evidence-based, and they are in alignment with the STM article sharing
principles.  They introduce absolutely no changes in our embargo
periods.  And they are not intended to suddenly embargo and make
inaccessible content currently available to readers =E2=80=93 as we have
already communicated in Elsevier Connect.

In fact, we have been developing services, in partnership with
libraries, to help institutional repositories track research output
and display content to their users. This includes:

=E2=80=A2  Sharing metadata: In order to showcase an institutions=E2=80=99 =
work, an
institutional repository must identify their institution=E2=80=99s research
output. By integrating the ScienceDirect metadata API into the
repository, this task becomes simple. Even in cases where the
repository doesn=E2=80=99t hold the full text manuscript, the article
information and abstract can be displayed..

=E2=80=A2  Sharing user access information and embedding final articles: We
are testing a workflow in which a user=E2=80=99s access level to the full t=
ext
is checked on the fly, and if full text access is available, the user
will be served the final published version, instead of the preprint or
manuscript hosted by the repository. Users who are not entitled to
view the full text of the final article will be led to the version
available in the repository, or- if this is not available- to a page
where they can view the first page of the article and options for
accessing it (including via interlibrary loan). This ensures that
users will always be served the best available version. This also
enables the repository to display the best available version to their
users even if no self-archived manuscript is available.

We have not only updated our policies, we are active in developing and
delivering technology that enables research to be shared more widely.

COAR states that the addition of a CC-BY-NC-ND license is unhelpful.
Feedback suggests that clarity about how manuscripts can be used is
welcome, when asked in surveys often choose NC ND of their own
volition (see the T&F study from 2014 at:
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/explore/open-access-survey-june2014.pdf
), and it works across a broad range of use cases.

Our refreshed policies are about green OA, and some elements of this =E2=80=
=93
for example the use of embargo periods =E2=80=93 are specifically for green=
 OA
when it is operating in tandem with the subscription business model.
Here time is needed for the subscription model to operate as libraries
will understandably not subscribe if this material is available
immediately and for free.

In closing, we appreciate an open dialogue and are always happy to
have a dialogue to discuss these, or any other, issues further.

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 555 555 I E: redactd@elsevier.com

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

Date:    Wed, 27 May 2015 18:53:01 -0400
From:    LIBLICENSE <liblicense@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: In Defence of Elsevier

From: Stevan Harnad <redactd@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 13:44:11 -0400

I beg the OA community to remain reasonable and realistic.

Please don't demand that Elsevier agree to immediate CC-BY. If
Elsevier did that, I could immediately start up a rival free-riding
publishing operation and sell all Elsevier articles immediately at cut
rate, for any purpose at all that I could get people to pay for.
Elsevier could no longer make a penny from selling the content it
invested in.

CC-BY-NC-ND is enough for now. It allows immediate harvesting for data-mini=
ng.

The OA movement must stop shooting itself in the foot by
over-reaching, insisting on having it all, immediately, thus instead
ending up with next to nothing, as now.

As I pointed out in a previous posting, the fact that Elsevier
requires all authors to adopt CC-BY-NC-ND license is a positive step.
Please don't force them to back-pedal!

Please read the terms, and reflect.

SH

Accepted Manuscript

Authors can share their accepted manuscript:

Immediately

* via their non-commercial personal homepage or blog.

* by updating a preprint in arXiv or RePEc with the accepted manuscript.

* via their research institute or institutional repository for
internal institutional uses or as part of an invitation-only research
collaboration work-group.

* directly by providing copies to their students or to research
collaborators for their personal use.

* for private scholarly sharing as part of an invitation-only work
group on commercial sites with which Elsevier has an agreement.

After the embargo period

* via non-commercial hosting platforms such as their institutional reposito=
ry.
* via commercial sites with which Elsevier has an agreement.

In all cases accepted manuscripts should:

* Link to the formal publication via its DOI.

* Bear a CC-BY-NC-ND license =E2=80=93 this is easy to do, click here to fi=
nd out how.

* If aggregated with other manuscripts, for example in a repository or
other site, be shared in alignment with our hosting policy.

* Not be added to or enhanced in any way to appear more like, or to
substitute for, the published journal article.

How to attach a user license:

Elsevier requires authors posting their accepted manuscript to attach
a non-commercial Creative Commons user license (CC-BY-NC-ND).  This is
easy to do. On your accepted manuscript add the following to the title
page, copyright information page, or header /footer: =C2=A9 YEAR, NAME.
Licensed under the Creative Commons [insert license details and URL].

For example: =C2=A9 2015, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

You can also include the license badges available from the Creative
Commons website to provide visual recognition. If you are hosting your
manuscript as a webpage you will also find the correct HTML code to
add to your page

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

Date:    Wed, 27 May 2015 18:44:14 -0400
From:    LIBLICENSE <liblicense@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: UKSG webinar 9 June - Creative Commons and Education =E2=80=93 are we there yet?

From: Maria Campbell <redactd@uksg.org>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 10:46:44 +0000

Dear Colleagues,

I am pleased to invite you to the next free UKSG webinar - CREATIVE
COMMONS AND EDUCATION - ARE WE THERE YET?

http://www.uksg.org/webinars/creativecommons

Date: Tuesday 9 June 2015
Time: 1400 BST
Duration: 45 minutes including Q&A (up to 60 minutes maximum if there
is sufficient demand for an extended Q&A)

Speaker:

Joscelyn Upendran, Co-founder of Zilpa

Join Joscelyn for a look at Creative Commons licences, their impact
and use in education.

This is a free webinar and open to all. If you are interested, but
unable to join the live event, please register anyway as a recording
will be made available to all who register.

For more information and to register, please visit:

http://www.uksg.org/webinars/creativecommons

Feedback from May's webinar: =E2=80=9COpen Access is a complex and potentia=
lly
very contentious area, e.g. academic freedom to publish.  So amongst
all the conflicting mandates and policies it was really useful to have
the institutional role so clearly delineated  - and an action plan to
follow up on.=E2=80=9D =E2=80=93 Candace Guite, University of Stirling  92%=
 of survey
respondents would recommend May's webinar.

Thank you for your attention. I do hope you can join us.

Maria

Maria Campbell
Digital Communications Associate, UKSG
E: redactd@uksg.org

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

Date:    Wed, 27 May 2015 18:46:33 -0400
From:    LIBLICENSE <liblicense@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: June 17 NISO Virtual Conference: The Eternal To-Do List: Making Ebooks work in Libraries

From: NISO Announce <redactd@niso.org>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 11:45:37 -0400

June 17 NISO Virtual Conference: The Eternal To-Do List: Making Ebooks
work in Libraries

Virtual conferences are 5-6 hour conferences held online in
webinar-like formats, with occasional breaks in the schedule for
participants. The longer length allows the depth of coverage of a
conference coupled with the convenience of a webinar.

Date: June 17, 2015

Time: 11:00 am - 5:00 pm Eastern

Event webpage: http://www.niso.org/news/events/2015/virtual_conferences/ete=
rnal_ebooks/

ABOUT THE VIRTUAL CONFERENCE

From scholarly monographs to textbooks, the range of e-book formats
and use cases is rapidly expanding. Libraries are on the front lines
of this issue, actively evolving their approach to offering e-books to
meet patron needs and expectations. This virtual conference, The
Eternal To-Do List: Making E-books Work in Libraries, will probe the
key issues surrounding e-books from a variety of library, technology,
and end-user viewpoints and share experiences of how some libraries
have met these challenges.

Participate in the community discussion for advancing e-book
distribution and understanding their use, as speakers examine issues
such as:

=E2=80=A2 How the four stakeholder communities=E2=80=94librarians, publishe=
rs,
suppliers, faculty and students=E2=80=94are affected by e-book acquisition,
usage, and technology changes

=E2=80=A2 E-book business models, including various demand driven acquisiti=
on
(DDA) options, and the impact on collection development, consortial
selection

=E2=80=A2 Evolving standards and best practices for e-book management

=E2=80=A2 Assessment and gauging the value of e-books through benchmarking =
and
case studies

=E2=80=A2 The reactions, engagement, and usage trends from student feedback=
 on e-books

=E2=80=A2 How e-textbooks are challenging libraries

=E2=80=A2 Creating e-book library =E2=80=9Cwish lists=E2=80=9D


TOPICS AND SPEAKERS

Keynote Address: E-Books: Promise into Practice
Suzanne M. Ward, Professor and Head of Collection Management, Purdue
University Libraries

Evaluating Academic Ebook Platforms from a User Perspective
Christina Mune, Academic Liaison Librarian, San Jose State University

Making ebooks discoverable
Erica Findley, Cataloging/Metadata Librarian and Sandy Macke, Catalog
and Metadata Administrator, Multnomah County Library

E-book Workflows: The Ongoing Challenges of Managing Materials and
Improving Discoverability
Molly Beisler, MA, MLS, Head, Discovery Services, Mathewson-IGT
Knowledge Center, University of Nevada

The Business Side: Making ebooks work in Libraries
Micah May, Director of Strategy & Business Development at New York
Public Library

DDA: How best practices lead to a healthy bottom line
Stephen Bosch, Materials Budget, Procurement, and Licensing Librarian,
University of Arizona Library

Roundtable Discussion: The e-book =E2=80=9Cecosystem=E2=80=9D and perspecti=
ves on the
e-book supply chain, including acquisition, usage, and technological
hurdles for accessibility and discoverability.

REGISTRATION

Registration is per site (access for one computer) and closes at 4:00
pm Eastern on June 16, 2015 (the day before the virtual conference).
Discounts are available for NISO members and students. All virtual
conference registrants receive access to the recorded version for one
year.

Can't make it on the day of the virtual conference? All registrants
receive access to the recorded version for one year. Take advantage of
the Virtual Conference subscription package
(http://www.niso.org/news/events/2015/virtual_conferences/#subscription)
for all six of the 2015 Virtual Conferences and save 33%. (Previously
held 2014 virtual conferences available in recorded versions.)

For more information and to register, visit the event webpage:
http://www.niso.org/news/events/2015/virtual_conferences/eternal_ebooks/

# # #

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

End of LIBLICENSE-L Digest - 26 May 2015 to 27 May 2015 (#2015-98)
******************************************************************