 |
 |
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>This information comes courtesy of the IFLA copyright programme.=20 >>Are Princeton's essentially the same terms/conditions as the=20 >>Harvard Mandate? > > It looks like this is indeed just another non-mandatory=20 > "mandate." The language about each faculty member automatically=20 > granting Princeton a non-exclusive license to "exercise any and=20 > all copyrights in his or her scholarly articles published in any=20 > medium," etc., is then followed by this important qualifier:=20 > "Upon the express direction of a Faculty member, the Provost or=20 > the Provost=B9s designate will waive or suspend application of this=20 > license for a particular article authored or co-authored by that=20 > Faculty member." > > So in other words, it's not an OA mandate, but rather an OA=20 > "mandate." You're bound by it unless you ask not to be, in which=20 > case you're not. 1. First, congratulations to Princeton University (my graduate alma mater!) for adopting an open access mandate: a copyright-reservation policy, adopted by unanimous faculty vote. http://roarmap.eprints.org/520/ 2. Princeton is following in the footsteps of Harvard in adopting the copyright-reservation policy pioneered by Stuart Shieber and Peter Suber. http://roarmap.eprints.org/75/ 4. I hope that Princeton will now also follow in the footsteps of Harvard by adding an immediate-deposit requirement with no waiver option to its copyright-reservation mandate, as Harvard has done. http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/545-guid.html 5. The Princeton copyright-reservation policy, like the Harvard copyright-reservation policy, can be waived if the author wishes: This is to allow authors to retain the freedom to choose where to publish, even if the journal does not agree to the copyright-reservation. 6. Adding an immediate-deposit clause, with no opt-out waiver option, retains all the properties and benefits of the copyright-reservation policy while ensuring that all articles are nevertheless deposited in the institutional repository upon publication, with no exceptions: Access to the deposited article can be embargoed, but deposit itself cannot; access is a copyright matter, deposit is not. http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/364-guid.html 7. Depositing all articles upon publication, without exception, is crucial to reaching 100% open access with certainty, and as soon as possible; hence it is the right example to set for the many other universities worldwide that are now contemplating emulating Harvard and Princeton by adopting open access policies of their own; copyright reservation alone, with opt-out, is not. http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/494-guid.html 8. The reason it is imperative that the deposit clause must be immediate and without a waiver option is that, without that, both when and whether articles are deposited at all is indeterminate: With the added deposit requirement the policy is a mandate; without it, it is just a gentleman/scholar's agreement. [Footnote: Princeton's open access policy is also unusual in having been adopted before Princeton has created an open access repository for its authors to deposit in: It might be a good idea to create the repository as soon as possible so Princeton authors can get into the habit of practising what they pledge from the outset...] Stevan Harnad EnablingOpenScholarship http://www.openscholarship.org/