Peter I'm not sure I fully understand your question: "Can you confirm that there are no green full text manuscripts in PMC?".
In my understanding the example http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3253247 is a green, full-text manuscript. However, if green in your definition means that it must have zero month embargo, then I suspect there won't be any ACS-published, author manuscripts in PMC that meet this criteria. I thought "green" was used to simply indicate that the version you are looking at was the author's version of the manuscript (after peer review). In contrast "gold" means (in my mind) the final published version (the version of record). Obviously, if we pay a fee for a gold article then we can demand (and we do) certain things, such as it must be available at the time of publication and it must be licenced using CC-BY. Regards R From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Peter Murray-Rust Sent: 13 July 2012 09:54 To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Chemistry and the Green Door On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Kiley, Robert <r.ki...@wellcome.ac.uk<mailto:r.ki...@wellcome.ac.uk>> wrote: Peter These 1059 articles were deposited via the ACS "open choice" option. Thanks - This is (I believe) hybrid Gold - author pays for MS to be "Open" in some definition of the term (but not yet CC-BY) There will be other ACS papers, funded by NIH authors, which are in PMC but were not routed through the "open choice" route. These papers will be made available after 12 months, and will not have re-use permissions. These papers are what NIH call "public access". By way of example this article published in Organic Letters is an NIH author manuscript. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3253247 This article would NOT have been included in the 1059 figure quoted above. Thanks for the example. Again, to interpret: * This is mandated by NIH. NIH-funded Authors must publish their work openly. The ACS complies with extreme reluctance, fighting all the way. The only reason it works is because the US government has more power than the ACS (and they have been taking this approach for some time). They get very high compliance because the government is their employer and US government institutions (I am visiting a national lab next week) have huge investment in bureaucracy. They will lose their jobs if they don't comply. Can you confirm that there are no Green full text manuscripts in PMC? Wellcome (and some other funders) are taking a similar approach. Their hold is weaker, but still strong - non-compliance will lead to loss of future grants and possible forfeiture of final grant payments. As I said I support this. It's harder than the NIH employee scheme because (a) many Wellcome papers are multi-institution and (b) the formal hold ends at the end of the grant (and many publications are post-grant) and (c) it needs investment in policing. P. -- Peter Murray-Rust Reader in Molecular Informatics Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry University of Cambridge CB2 1EW, UK +44-1223-763069 This message has been scanned for viruses by Websense Hosted Email Security - www.websense.com
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
