On 2013-05-03, at 2:57 AM, David Prosser david.pros...@rluk.ac.uk wrote:
I agree with Andras and I cannot see how any publisher who has a policy along
the lines of:
You may make your author version freely available without embargo unless you
are mandated (by funder or institution) to do
On 2013-05-03, at 5:02 AM, Andras Holl h...@konkoly.hu wrote:
Though this be madness, yet there is method in it. I think that could be said
on Elsevier's OA
policy, because of two reasons. Firstly, it quite effectively hinders OA.
Secondly, however badly
constructed this OA policy is,
Since -- exactly like Springer's (hedge-free) rights-retention policy (and
countless others) -- Elsevier's policy does indeed formally recognize right
of the authors of the articles published in 2000 Elsevier journals to make
them immediately OA (unembargoed), I would say that the angelic
Elsevier's policy is now clear:
Accepted author manuscripts (AAM): Immediate posting and dissemination of AAM’s
is allowed to personal websites, to institutional repositories, or to arXiv.
However, if your institution has an open access policy or mandate that requires
you to post, Elsevier
Back in 2002 when the debates about Gold vs. Green OA began, I and other
advocates for developing Gold OA publishing argued that the friendly stance
of publishers like Elsevier to self-archiving was a transient state, and
that as soon as people started to make appreciable numbers of papers
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 9:08 AM, brent...@ulg.ac.be wrote:
Elsevier's policy is now clear:
*Accepted author manuscripts
(AAM)http://www.elsevier.com/about/open-access/open-access-policies/article-posting-policy#accepted-author-manuscript
*: Immediate posting and dissemination of AAM’s is
(Cross-posted)
The Economist has published another piece on open access publishing:
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21577035-open-access-scientific-publishing-gaining-ground-free-all
I was struck by one paragraph in particular:
Outsell, a Californian consultancy, estimates
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:33 AM, David Kane dk...@wit.ie wrote:
Thanks for flagging this. I am not clear about exactly what you mean
though.
Are you talking about an extra clause in the existing Institutional
LICENCING agreement, or a second Institutional agreement that they are now
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,
Sally
Cost to the research community, not the narrow costs to the publisher. If it
helps you just add 'to the research community' every time you see the word
'cost' or 'costs'.
Of course many would agree that in the current system there is little relation
between costs to the publisher and
10 matches
Mail list logo
