[GOAL] Elsevier's query re: "positive things from publishers that should be encouraged, celebrated, recognized"

[Stevan Harnad]

**Cross-Posted**

      El 11/05/2012 11:19, Wise, Alicia (Elsevier) asked:


            [W]hat positive things are established scholarly
            publishers doing to facilitate the various visions for
            open access and future scholarly communications that
            should be encouraged, celebrated, recognized?   
Dr Alicia Wise
Director of Universal Access
Elsevier I The Boulevard I Langford Lane I Kidlington I Oxford I OX5
1GB
P: +44 (0)1865 843317 I M: +44 (0) 7823 536 826 I
E: a.w...@elsevier.com I
Twitter: @wisealic


On 2012-05-11, at 6:13 AM, Reme Melero wrote:

      I would recommend the following change in one clause of the  What
      rights do I retain as a journal author*? stated in Elsevier's
      portal, which says

      "the right to post a revised personal version of the text of the
      final journal article (to reflect changes made in the peer review
      process) on your personal or institutional website or server for
      scholarly purposes*, incorporating the complete citation and with a
      link to the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of the article (but not
      in subject-oriented or centralized repositories or institutional
      repositories with mandates for systematic postings unless there is a
      specific agreement with the publisher. <externalLink_3.gif>Click
      here for further information);"

      By this one:

      "the right to post a revised personal version of the text of the
      final journal article (to reflect changes made in the peer review
      process) on your personal,  institutional website,  subject-oriented
      or centralized repositories or institutional repositories or server
      for scholarly purposes, incorporating the complete citation and with
      a link to the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of the article "


      I think this could be something to be encouraged, celebrated and
      recognized!


That would be fine. Or even this simpler one would be fine:

"the right to post a revised personal version of the text of the final journal
article (to reflect changes made in the peer review process) on your 
personal, 
institutional website or institutional repositories or server for scholarly
purposes, incorporating the complete citation and with a link to the Digital
Object Identifier (DOI) of the article "

The metadata and link can be harvested from the 
institutional repositories by institution-external 
repositories or search services, and the shameful,
cynical, self-serving and incoherent clause about 
"mandates  for systematic postings"  ("you may 
post if you wish but not if you must"), which attempts 
to take it all back, is dropped.

That clause -- added when Elsevier realized that
Green Gratis OA mandates were catching on -- is a 
paradigmatic example of the publisher FUD and 
double-talk that Andrew Adams and others were 
referring to on GOAL.

Dropping it would be a great cause for encouragement, 
celebration and recognition, and would put Elsevier
irreversibly on the side of the angels.

Stevan Harnad




    [ Part 2: "Attached Text" ]

_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal