Dear Ricky, Colleagues,
> I would be interested to know the size, makeup and roll of
> people in repository team.
You may be interested in a SHERPA document: "Institutional Repositories:
Staff and Skills Set" - which is available from:
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/documents/staffandskills2008.pdf
This identifies the skills that a repository team needs and is being
revised annually to maintain currency. From visits to a number of
institutions in this country and abroad, there seems little commonality
in the form of a repository team to fill these roles. Some institutions
separate out repository functions with identifiable posts, while others
are trying to integrate duties into other staff jobs. Much seems to
depend on the people already available on the ground within each
institution and where their skills lie and what capacity (if any!) they
have within existing jobs.
> We are attempting to setup a team and are still struggling
> with the manpower requirements that might be needed to check
> copyright.
The scale of the task of copyright checking will depend on the sliding
scale of whether you are expecting authors to deposit items themselves;
or offering assistance with that process; or offering to deposit the
first one alongside the author - then they are on their own; or working
through third-parties within departments; or targetting departments or
sections of output for advocacy; or offering a fully mediated service
where all items are deposited on behalf of an author, etc
It may be that you have to define the service in terms of the assistance
available and plan as to how that service can change over time with an
increase/decrease of resources or deposits. The extent to which it is
felt copyright clearance should be checked by a nominated individual or
service rather than by the author, departmental depositor, or
semi-automatically through the RoMEO API, for example, is a matter of
institutional policy and risk management practices.
Apart from that, obviously there are well rehearsed arguments for and
against mediated and individual deposit processes and as you say,
initial volumes will probably mean that any copyright checking can be
handled by one person. However, apart from load and scalability, one
danger is that if a full central copyright clearance service is offered,
then authors can continue to be fully insulated from any appreciation of
copyright issues and we continue to have to deal with the consequences
of unthinking copyright assignment or restrictive licensing, rather than
changing behaviours.
Regards,
Bill
--
Bill Hubbard
SHERPA Manager
SHERPA - www.sherpa.ac.uk
RSP - www.rsp.ac.uk
RoMEO - www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo
JULIET - www.sherpa.ac.uk/juliet
OpenDOAR - www.opendoar.org
SHERPA
Greenfield Medical Library
University of Nottingham
Queens Medical Centre
Nottingham
NG7 2UH
UK
Tel +44(0) 115 846 7657
Fax +44(0) 115 846 8244
* * * * * * * *
This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
|