Below are some corrections to the partial list of hybrid OA publishers
that I posted. The posting consisted of some excerpts from email
information sent by Bill Hubbard of SHERPA-Romeo (preceded by "> ") plus
some information on numbers of journals and hybrid journals (provided
by me, not by Bill, and not preceded by "> ").

Any accuracies in the journal or hybrid-journal counts originated from
me not Bill! I shall check and correct any miscounts, and apologise
both for the errors and for any impression that they originated with
Bill rather than me!

Stevan Harnad

PS Any corrections should be sent to me offline, and I will post a summary.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 11:57:09 +0100
From: Hubbard Bill <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Fwd: List of Hybrid OA publishers?

Dear Colleagues,

I would like to correct a misleading impression made by a recent
posting. Some of the information on hybrid journals and publishers'
policies which Stevan Harnad quotes me as providing is not what I wrote.

As Stevan Harnad said, the RoMEO colour codes have been changed from
those in my original email: but in addition, the numbers of hybrid
journals produced by the publisher have been added to my text. Some of
these figures are incorrect.

An edited summary of my original email is as follows:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
<SNIP> . . . the introduction of such a hybrid model gives a commercial
disincentive to allow immediate archiving - or even author-version
archiving at all - but the numbers of publishers who have introduced
hybrid systems actually retreating from a GREEN position is quite
interesting.

The following publishers listed on RoMEO have introduced a hybrid
journal programme:

* OUP
OUP introduced embargoes at the same time as their hybrid programme and
dropped from GREEN to YELLOW

* Blackwell
Blackwell introduced embargoes at the same time as their hybrid
programme and dropped from GREEN to YELLOW

* CUP
CUP have launched their hybrid programme and still explicitly allow
author's version immediate archiving and then the archiving of the
publishers pdf after 12 months. They remain GREEN

* Elsevier
Elsevier introduced a hybrid programme and still allow unembargoed
author-version archiving. They remain GREEN

* Springer
Springer introduced a hybrid programme and still allow unembargoed
author-version archiving. They remain GREEN

* Wiley
Wiley have not followed up their hybrid announcement with any
restriction on archiving that we know of. They remain GREEN.

* Royal Society
The Royal Society introduced a hybrid programme. They have a statement
which implies that they have withdrawn their archiving rights:
http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/index.cfm?page=1334
"What is your policy on copyright assignment?
Our policy is that the author retains copyright, but must provide us
with a 'licence to publish'. This agreement allows the authors to post
their own postprint of the accepted article on an institutional or
subject-based repository 12 months after publication. Authors
participating in EXiS Open Choice will be able to post the final
published version on repositories as soon as the article is published. "

However, they retain their existing CTAs on-line, which are what are
signed by authors. We have written for clarification. In the meantime,
they remain GREEN

* BMJ
The BMJ press release announced that:
"authors will now be permitted to deposit their version of an article in
their institutions' or a subject based repository immediately on
acceptance, subject to a six month embargo from the date of print
publication before making it free to all. "

This sounds as though it were a new permissive announcement as opposed
to a retreat from their previous GREEN position. . . .
We checked with the BMJ (the journal) and they still allow unembargoed
author-version archiving. We are waiting to hear whether BMJ (the
publishers and all their journals) are going to insist on the letter of
their Press Release and retreat from their GREEN position.

Until we hear to the contrary, we will go on the available CTA, which is
what is signed, rather than a Press Release - so they remain GREEN
. . .

So, out of 8 publishers introducing hybrid programmes, only Blackwell
and OUP have also withdrawn archiving rights, but the Royal Society
looks like it may do, while the BMJ is uncertain.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * *

Regards,

Bill



--

Bill Hubbard
SHERPA Manager

SHERPA - www.sherpa.ac.uk
RoMEO - www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php
JULIET - www.sherpa.ac.uk/juliet/
OpenDOAR - www.opendoar.org

Information Services
King's Meadow Campus
University of Nottingham
Lenton Lane
Nottingham
NG7 2NA
UK

Tel +44(0) 115 846 7657
Fax +44(0) 115 846 8244

  * * * * * * * *



> -----Original Message-----
> From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]
> I.ORG] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad
> Sent: 15 August 2006 15:25
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Fwd: List of Hybrid OA publishers?
>
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2006, Pauline Simpson wrote:
>
> > Is there a quick answer to this? (forwarded from another list)
> >
> > >From: Frank Norman <[log in to unmask]>
> > >
> > >Can anyone direct me to an up-to-date list of publishers (or
> > >journals) with hybrid OA options? The DOAJ does not seem to cover
> > >such journals.
>
> There is as yet no systematic list, but Bill Hubbard has
> recently sent the
> following information from the SHERPA Romeo directory
> http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php
>
> I've transformed his data from the more complicated
> SHERPA-Romeo colour code
> (green, blue, yellow, white, [red, grey])
> to the simpler EPrints-Romeo colour-code:
>
> GREEN = green light to immediately self-archive the postprint
> OR both the
> postprint and the preprint
>
> PALE-GREEN = green light to immediately self-archive the preprint
>
> From: Hubbard Bill <Bill.Hubbard AT nottingham.ac.uk>
>
> > The following publishers listed on RoMEO have introduced a hybrid
> > journal programme:
>
> GREEN hybrid journals
>
> (1) Springer: 1300 journals; all GREEN (all hybrid)
> > Springer introduced a hybrid programme and still allow unembargoed
> > author-version archiving.
> > Springer explicitly re-affirmed the archiving rights
> > when [SHERPA] contacted them.
>
> (2) Wiley: 412 journals; all GREEN (all hybrid?)
> > Wiley have not followed up their hybrid announcement with any
> > restriction on archiving that we know of.
>
> (3) Elsevier: 2219 journals; all GREEN (not all hybrid yet)
> > Elsevier introduced a hybrid programme and still allow unembargoed
> > author-version archiving.
>
> (4) CUP: 186 journals; all GREEN; 15 hybrid
> > CUP have launched their hybrid programme and still explicitly allow
> > author's version immediate archiving and then the archiving of the
> > publishers pdf after 12 months.
>
> (5) BMJ: 27 journals: all GREEN (all hybrid; green ambiguous)
> > "authors will now be permitted to deposit their version of
> an article in
> > their institutions' or a subject based repository immediately on
> > acceptance, subject to a six month embargo from the date of print
> > publication before making it free to all. "
>
> (6) Royal Society: 7 journals; all GREEN (all hybrid; green ambiguous)
> > The Royal Society introduced a hybrid programme. They have
> a statement
> > which implies that they have withdrawn their archiving rights...
> > http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/index.cfm?page=1334
> > However, they retain their existing CTAs on-line, which are what are
> > signed by authors. We have written for clarification. In
> the meantime,
> > they remain GREEN
>
> PALE-GREEN hybrid journals
>
> (7) OUP: 188 journals; all PALE-GREEN (all hybrid, backslid
> from GREEN)]
> > OUP introduced embargoes at the same time as their hybrid
> programme and
> > dropped from [GREEN to PALE-GREEN]
>
> (8) Blackwell: 698 journals: all PALE-GREEN (all hybrid,
> backslid from GREEN)]
> > Blackwell introduced embargoes at the same time as their hybrid
> > programme....
>