Heather
It is not as easy as that, unfortunately. The university is a party to what
happens in the case of copying/deposit/publication by virtue of creating
an institutional repository, not to mention a mandate policy. (Different for
deposit in Arxiv.) The situation is made more complex when
Andrew Adams raises an important point from my perspective, and this problem is
not limited to the UK.
Even though I am a librarian and enthusiastic advocate of self-archiving
myself, when my library has policies that don't let me upload my work and get
my URL immediately, my inclination is to
I do not believe they are asking for anything contradictory.
We all agree on (1), but when (2) is asking (some) librarians to get out of the
way, it means just that they should not interfere with the process of self
archiving on the basis of such considerations as scientific quality or any kind
+100 to what Richard said.
they should not interfere with the process of self archiving on the
basis of such considerations as scientific quality or any kind of personal
judgement.
Ah, but what about when the review step is put into place to ensure that
copyright is not violated?
IR
Universities do not, and should not, assume liability for what others may do on
their premises, whether physical or virtual. If someone commits a crime on
campus such as stealing personal property, it is the fault of the thief, not
the university.
Responsibility for copyright should rest with
I’m not sure that Dr Weckowska has thought through the full implications of the
HEFCE policy:
In addition, she says: “Under the new HEFCE policy, researchers have incentives
to make their best 4 papers accessible through the gold or green OA route
(assuming that the REF again requires 4
The challenge now for UK Universities will be to keep librarians out of the
way of reserachers, or their assistants, depositing the basic meta-data and
full text in the repository. At the University of Reading, where I was
involved in early developments around the IR but left the University
