 |
 |
Hi Stevan – We continue to permit immediate self-archiving in an author’s institutional repository. This is now true for all institutional repositories, not only those with which we have agreements or those that do not have mandates. You are correct that under our old policy, authors could post anywhere without an embargo if their institution didn’t have a mandate. Our new policy is designed to be consistent and fair for everybody, and we believe it now reflects how the institutional repository landscape has evolved in the last 10+ years. We require embargo periods because for subscription articles, an appropriate amount of time is needed for journals to deliver value to subscribing customers before the manuscript becomes available for free. Libraries understandably will not subscribe if the content is immediately available for free. Our sharing policy now reflects that reality. With kind wishes, Alicia 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 536 826 I E: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Twitter: @wisealic From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 1:24 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Elsevier updates it article-sharing policies, perspectives and services On May 1, 2015, at 7:30 AM, Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF) <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Dear Stevan – Elsevier supports the need for researchers to share their research and collaborate effectively. In light of the recent STM consultation on the principles for article sharing,<http://www.stm-assoc.org/stm-consultations/scn-consultation-2015/> I wanted to reach out to you directly to let you know about some changes we are making which will enable Elsevier published content to be shared more widely. To underpin these efforts we have updated our approach – informed by very constructive input from institutions, authors and funders we work with - and are now launching new guidelines. I invite you to read our article hosting<https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/hosting/_nocache> and article sharing<http://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-posting-policy> guidelines on Elsevier.com<http://elsevier.com/>. We have published an article on Elsevier Connect<http://www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-updates-its-policies-perspectives-and-services-on-article-sharing>, our online communication platform to explain some further details behind the changes and the new technologies and exciting pilots we are deploying to facilitate sharing. As always, we welcome comments or suggestions, and are happy to discuss any questions or concerns. Please do not hesitate to contact me. With very kind wishes, Alicia Key highlights * We continue to support sharing of preprints, accepted manuscripts, and final publications and provide simple guidelines for authors about how they can share at each stage of their workflow. * We are providing a range of options for researchers to share their work publicly, including a newShare Links<http://www.elsevier.com/journal-authors/share-link> service which provides 50 days free access to the final article on ScienceDirect. * We are making it clear that we want to work with hosting platforms, such as institutional repositories, to make sharing easy and seamless for researchers. We will no longer require an agreement with institutional repositories and instead clarify that self-archived accepted manuscripts can be used under a CC-BY-NC-ND license and that they can be hosted and shared privately during the embargo and publically shared after embargo. * We are also providing a wider range of ways for researchers to share their work privately during the journal’s embargo period, such as in private workgroups on sites such as Mendeley and MyScienceWork. 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 536 826 I E: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>Twitter: @wisealic Dear Alicia, I've looked over the latest Elsevier revision of its policy on author OA self-archiving, as requested. The essential points of the latest policy revision are two: I. Elsevier still endorses both immediate-deposit and immediate-OA, for the pre-refereeing preprint, anywhere (author's institutional home page, author's institutional repository, Arxiv, etc.). II. Elsevier still endorses immediate-deposit and immediate-OA for the refereed postprint on the author's home page or in Arxiv, but not immediate-OA in the author's institutional repository, where OA is embargoed. You asked for my comments. Here they are: (1) Elsevier should state quite explicitly that its latest revision of its policy on author OA self-archiving has taken a very specific step backward from the policy first adopted in 2004<http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/3771.html>: An author may post his version of the final paper on his personal web site and on his institution's web site (including its institutional respository). Each posting should include the article's citation and a link to the journal's home page (or the article's DOI). The author does not need our permission to do this, but any other posting (e.g. to a repository elsewhere) would require our permission. By "his version" we are referring to his Word or Tex file, not a PDF or HTML downloaded from ScienceDirect - but the author can update his version to reflect changes made during the refereeing and editing process. Elsevier will continue to be the single, definitive archive for the formal published version. Elsevier has withdrawn its endorsement of immediate-OA in the author's institutional repository. It's best not to try to conceal this in language that makes it sound as if Elsevier is taking positive steps in response to the demand for OA. (2) The distinction between the author's institutional home page and the author's institutional repository is completely arbitrary and empty. Almost no one consults either a home page or a repository directly. The deposits and links are simply harvested by Google and Google Scholar (and other harvesters), and that's where users search and retrieve them. (Hence all an institution need do is designate the institutional disk sector containing the author's publicatiosn in the "repository" to be part of the author's "home page.") (3) If an author (foolishly) decides to comply with an Elsevier OA embargo, there is the automated copy-request Button, with which the author can provide a copy almost-immediately, with one click from the requestor and one click from the author. (Elsevier's reputation is not enhanced by the fact that many users and authors will now have to do two extra clicks to get a copy, because Elsevier was not happy to let them do it with one click.) My advice is accordingly to go back to the original 2004 policy. You had it right the first time. The rest has only muddied Elsevier's reputation. With best wishes, Stevan ________________________________ Elsevier Limited. Registered Office: The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom, Registration No. 1982084, Registered in England and Wales.