On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 9:08 AM, <brent...@ulg.ac.be> wrote: > > Elsevier's policy is now clear: >
Well, Elsevier's intentions are maybe clear (or clearer now) but, personally, I wouldn't qualify as "clear" a policy which is scattered among many documents and which, even after being read and reread, still leaves much to interpretation, particularly on what it could imply. For instance, the policy seems to state that Elsevier invites each and every research institution in the world adopting an OA policy to enter into an agreement. This is already a big slump to swallow, but if one plays the game and considers such a stance reasonable (which I don't), one finds that the nature of these agreements is quite hard to assess: What will be the conditions? Who will pay for this extra layer of negotiations and paperwork? Will there be fees? Will the agreements be linked with others, like site licenses? And the interested and honest reader trying to make his or her own idea about all this is not much helped by being told to consult existing agreements between Elsevier and funding bodies that mandate deposit (usually in centralized repositories), which is quite a different situation. So I strongly support the advice to ignore altogether all these extra and confusing conditions. Let's ask Elsevier the question in our own terms: 1. Do you, YES or NO, allow posting of author manuscripts? 2. If YES: a) Which version can be posted: preprint, postprint, publisher-formated? b) Where can it be posted: author's or institution's website, repository (institutional or centralized)? c) When can it be posted: upon acceptation, after an embargo period (for all or some journals)? and accept only answers to that question. _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
