Dear Andy, as I read it, the elaborate language provided by Springer carefully avoids the exact situation of interest: the ability to post a version whose text and illustrations have been corrected to be the same as the published version, but the article is not identical: i.e., does not have the same layout, etc. Furthermore, the pdfs discussed are Springer-provided pdfs; I see nothing that discusses the use of a pdf the author prepares himself from the final printed version using a scanner and Acrobat: these too will not really be identical to the ones on the Springer server because their quality will typically be much lower. One publishes with Springer in the first place in part because of the superb quality of their print and electronic output.
The publisher could have prepared a statement resolving these ambiguous statements, and apparently has chosen to leave them ambiguous. I therefore think that any author could, in good faith, choose any of these methods that have not been specifically prohibited. There is a purpose in deliberately ambiguous language in contracts, which is when neither party wants to establish a firm precedent that might prove not to their liking. Surely we all hope that as Springer and other publishers gain confidence with "green" OA, they will relax their requirements and specifically permit posting of the final pdfs. There is certainly an example to follow, because they all once prohibited interlibrary load from electronic versions, and now almost all do. In the intermediate period, their language was often ambiguous, and intelligent librarians interpreted it in accordance with their patrons' best interest. We would, imho, be well advised to make vigorous use of the rights our campaign has won. Dr. David Goodman Associate Professor Palmer School of Library and Information Science Long Island University [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum on behalf of Andy Powell Sent: Thu 9/30/2004 3:45 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Green, Gold, Elsevier, Springer On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Stevan Harnad wrote: > SPRINGER: > "[Springer] Authors are encouraged to post [= self-archive] their > electronic pre-press articles and will not be required to remove > electronic pre-press articles from publicly accessible servers > (including the author's own home page) once the article has been > accepted for publication, nor upon actual publication. At the > moment of publication of the final article the author is kindly > requested to provide a link from the pre-press article to the final > published article in order to stimulate usage of the peer-reviewed > and accepted work." > http://www.springeronline.com/sgw/cda/frontpage/0,11855,3-111-12-124783-0,00.html > > (Note that the Springer statement is a bit vaguer, but of course Springer > authors too should update their preprints to incorporate the changes made > during the peer review and editing process.) Are you sure about this last bit? The Springer Copyright Policy goes on to say (under 'author retained rights') --- cut --- Pre-press: the right to retain a pre-press version of the article on a public electronic server such as the World Wide Web. Springer does not require that authors remove versions of their article that differ from the version as published by Springer from publicly accessible servers, however, Springer asks that a link be made to the final published article and that the following statement accompany that link: The original publication is available at http://www.springerlink.com/to be posted with the pre-press article. Please use the appropriate URL and/or DOI for the article. Uncorrected proofs: the right to post the uncorrected proofs of the article on a public electronic server such as the World Wide Web or the author's homepage. These proofs will be sent to you after acceptance by the journal. Springer does not require that authors remove versions of their paper that differ from the version as published by Springer from publicly accessible servers, but Springer asks for a link to the final article to be posted with proofs. Final article on a secure network: the right to post the final article on a secure network (not accessible to the public) within the employer's institute. Unfortunately, for logistical reasons it is not currently Springer's policy to provide PDF files. If this poses a particular problem for you or if you have a specific requirement, please contact our Special Licensing Department. Final article on a public server: posting of the final published article on a non-commercial public server is allowed when using protected PDFs that are available at a surcharge through Springers PDF-offprint program. --- cut --- which seems to me to quite clearly state that you can only make the final (i.e. corrected, post-press) version available on a secure network and/or after having paid the surcharge? Andy -- Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell/ +44 1225 383933 Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/ ECDL 2004, Bath, UK - 12-17 Sept 2004 - http://www.ecdl2004.org/
