Connotea: Bookmarks matching tag oa.new (50 items) |
- All research funded by NHMRC to be accessible free of charge
- More bang for your buck! - Getting more content into your publications
- hbxt.org: WissenschaftlerInnen in Deutschland gegen Elsevier
- CAUT - Copyright agreement with Western and Toronto a bad and unwarranted deal
- “Church as Wikipedia”: Scholarly publishing encounters an open source worldview
- Indian institutional repositories: a study of user's perspective
- Digital Academics: Academic Blogging (AB) As Open-Access (OA) Publishing
- Networking, Scholarship and Service: The Place of Science Blogging in Academia | Context and Variation, Scientific American Blog Network
- Academic publishing must go digital to survive
- A Haystack Full of Needles: Scholarly Access Challenges in Museum Video Archives
- Academic Authors Letter to Judge Chin Feb 2012 (Samuelson)
- ("open access" OR "open data") (research OR science OR scholarship)
- Academics Object to Class Certification in Google Books Case
- Announcing the Open Definition Licenses Service
- The Research Works Act: a comment
- @ccess is launched!
- Promoting global access to law: developing an open access index for official authenticated legal information. Part 2: Europe | World Library and Information Congress
- Greener Journals
- The Open-Access Movement Reaches a New Low: Greener Journals
- Aaron Swartz Hacks the Attention Economy - Technology Review
| All research funded by NHMRC to be accessible free of charge Posted: 21 Feb 2012 06:35 AM PST theconversation.edu.au "[Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)] has updated its policy on open access to published research, aligning us with the practices of other international health and medical research funders such as the UN National Institutes of Health, the UK Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust. From July this year, we will be mandating the deposit of publication outputs arising from NHMRC funded research into an institutional repository within 12 months of publication. The next steps will be improving public and other researchers’ access to publicly funded data. NHMRC is a signatory to the Joint Statement on Data Sharing of Public Health Research, demonstrating our commitment to the timely and responsible sharing of public health data...." |
| More bang for your buck! - Getting more content into your publications Posted: 20 Feb 2012 07:10 PM PST figshare.com "Have you ever found yourself limited by the constraints of a journal? Traditional journals often have limits on the number of files that you can put into the paper, even as supplemental information. We now have the technology to easily make all of the supporting information available, and yet are limited by journal restrictions....This is another way in which figshare can help. With figshare you can add as much supplemental data to a publication as you wish, for free. The links are persistent and you even get the metrics on these research objects to see the true reach of your research. Researchers have already started to use figshare as a store for research data that is linked to traditional publications...." |
| hbxt.org: WissenschaftlerInnen in Deutschland gegen Elsevier Posted: 20 Feb 2012 07:07 PM PST |
| CAUT - Copyright agreement with Western and Toronto a bad and unwarranted deal Posted: 20 Feb 2012 06:49 PM PST www.caut.ca "The Canadian Association of University Teachers is condemning an agreement two universities have made that allows for the surveillance of faculty correspondence, unjustified restriction to copyrighted works and more than a million-dollar increase in fees. This week, the University of Western Ontario and the University of Toronto signed a deal with the licensing group Access Copyright that includes: provisions defining e-mailing hyperlinks as equivalent to photocopying a document; a flat fee of $27.50 for each full-time equivalent student; and, surveillance of academic staff email. “Toronto’s and Western Ontario’s actions are inexplicable,” said James L. Turk, CAUT executive director. “They have buckled under to Access Copyright’s outrageous and unjustified demands at a time when courts have extended rights to use copyrighted material, better alternatives are becoming available to the services Access offers and just before the passage of new federal copyright legislation that provides additional protections for the educational sector”. Turk also pointed out that the Supreme Court is set to clarify the educational use of copyrighted works in the coming months, clarifications that could undercut Access’s bargaining position. In contrast to Western Ontario and Toronto, many institutions have opted out of agreements with Access Copyright or are fighting its demands at the Copyright Board of Canada. “These two universities threw in the towel on the copyright battle prematurely,” said Turk. “We call on other post-secondary institutions not to follow Toronto’s and Western Ontario’s example of capitulating to Access Copyright. It‘s time to stand up for the right to fair and reasonable access to copyrighted works for educational purposes”...." |
| “Church as Wikipedia”: Scholarly publishing encounters an open source worldview Posted: 20 Feb 2012 06:03 PM PST Omega Alpha | Open Access, (21 Feb 2012) |
| Indian institutional repositories: a study of user's perspective Posted: 20 Feb 2012 02:45 PM PST Program: electronic library and information systems 46 (1), 92 (02 Oct 2012) Abstract: The present study aims to investigate the experience, contribution and opinions of users of respective institutional repositories (IRs) developed in India....The data collection tool was a web questionnaire....It was observed that 85.94 percent of respondents (154) were aware of the IR facility/service and 14.05 percent (26) were not aware of IR. More than half of the respondents, i.e. 52.43 percent (97), learned about the IR service through links provided on institutions' websites. About 36.21 percent of the respondents had not contributed to any type of repository, while 25.94 percent of respondents had contributed to their IR. A higher percentage (16.76 percent) of respondents felt it was an “easy and fast way to communicate research results”. The majority of the respondents, i.e. 113 (61.08 percent), were willing to deposit symposium/conference/seminar papers. The most important reason for contribution was found to be preservation of documents for the future. Peer review was very much acceptable as a quality control mechanism. More than half of the respondents (57.84 percent) wanted to provide open access without any barrier for their ideal repository.... |
| Digital Academics: Academic Blogging (AB) As Open-Access (OA) Publishing Posted: 20 Feb 2012 01:57 PM PST Vertebrate Social Behavior, (15 Feb 2012) "A sub- "sub-species" of Open Access Publishing has arisen in the domain of Academic Blogging. This initiative is being driven, primarily, by young, non-tenured, female faculty members....I think these young academic bloggers have the potential to generate new "paradigms" for women and for traditional academic departments. For example, one department is planning a course titled: Cyborg Anthropology: The Study of Human-Machine Systems. Other academic bloggers are beginning to document the Project's/Movement's history and connectivities and, also, to compare/contrast the new blogger-driven Project/Movement with other oppositional faculty movements (in the US and internationally)...The purpose of the present blogpost is to situate the new Academic Blogging Project/Movement within the domain of OA Publishing and to facilitate accommodation of the very substantial OA literature for the new project's purposes. I have three primary theses that are not intended to be comprehensive but to provide a stimulus for thought and action: Thesis 1: Academic Blogging (AB)= Open-Access (OA) Publishing= Digital Academics= "Functional [Digital] Modules"= Digital Connectomes= Collaborative Digital Networks= "Digital Economics" Thesis 2: "Ladybusiness"..."can provide a different set of metaphors" (Jaron Lanier 2012, bloggingheads.tv) Thesis 3: The large OA literature could facilitate attainment of AB goals and objectives, in particular, legitimizing AB as publishing on par with publications conventionally deemed acceptable academic currency...." |
| Posted: 20 Feb 2012 01:42 PM PST blogs.scientificamerican.com "So that third year review committee has a tough job ahead of itself in a case like mine. I don’t look like most of the people who have gotten tenure before me, at least in terms of how I allocate my time....[H]ow do they talk about my blog? It doesn’t help that “blog” doesn’t sound very academic (oh, if only I had thought to call this the Context and Variation Monograph). And it doesn’t help that this writing isn’t just for scholars, but for everybody. That’s not because non-blogging academics don’t see the point of interacting with the public, but because this particular way of doing it is so strange to them. This isn’t a radio interview, or a book, or a talk at the local library, but a style of writing where the jargon is not academic....At Science Online last year, John Hawks said that “blogging is at best a tertiary activity.” And I would agree. But that still puts it on the radar for those of us blogging pre-tenure today. I have no desire to alter my writing style or choice of topics on my blog to help me get tenure. At the same time, I would like to be able to articulate the ways in which the process of blogging, the networking from blogging, and scholarly blog posts are a meaningful part of my identity and production as a tenure-track professor....Blogging is scholarly writing....Finally, the main reason this type of scholarly writing is important is that it makes critiques public among fellow scholars. By airing our grievances, we may arrive at new ideas, or at least achieve a grudging respect for our differences. And this type of post-publication peer review can happen more quickly than letters to the editor in a journal, allowing for faster transmission of ideas...." |
| Academic publishing must go digital to survive Posted: 20 Feb 2012 01:31 PM PST theconversation.edu.au "Undoubtedly, open access is one of the best tools used to ensure the broad dissemination of scholarship. [Sydney University Press's] top-downloaded book, Let Sleeping Dogs Lie? by Simon Chapman has had more than 10,000 downloads since its release in 2010. In 2011, there were over four million total downloads of ANU ePress titles. As recent debates in The Australian demonstrate, the proponents of traditional, print-based models of scholarly publishing are losing touch with the modern system of scholarly communication. Researchers want the products of their research activity to appear promptly, in a digital format and with a creative commons licence so that they can share them with colleagues and students without infringing copyright law. It’s not only the publishing industry, but also government bodies who are slow to recognise changing paradigms. As Colin Steele has recently written, [Australian] government policy towards open access remains fragmented and inconsistent....The conflict between commercially driven national university press network proposed and the digital, open access model developed by not-for-profit university presses is part of a wider debate about the future of scholarly publishing and the ownership of research output. Should it remain in the hands of commercial publishers? Or should it be in the hands of open access advocates? Should government funding go towards supporting traditional university presses and their profits, or towards supporting the dissemination of Australian scholarship? How should we encourage further research and expansion of knowledge? The [OA] model proposed by e-presses is surely the more efficient and successful way to publish and disseminate the research output of Australian scholars. It is the future of scholarly publishing...." |
| A Haystack Full of Needles: Scholarly Access Challenges in Museum Video Archives Posted: 20 Feb 2012 01:15 PM PST Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 38 (3), 32-7 (Feb 2012) Editor's summary: Museums are increasingly turning to video as an easy and inexpensive method of documentation and of developing valuable primary resources, but numerous barriers interfere with scholars’ use of the materials. While technical difficulties are diminishing and attitudes and traditions are shifting, issues of intellectual property rights and information retrieval remain. Publishing video content online first demands a comprehensive rights assessment and clearing. Even more challenging is dealing with information retrieval in time-based and visual-aural resources, which makes finding a specific bit of data in mounds of footage a daunting task. Transcription enables free text search but is costly, time consuming and not entirely effective, delivering only the verbal aspect of original content. Descriptive metadata can be tied to time codes, adding broad or granular indexing to support navigation and retrieval, but the same drawbacks apply. Possible solutions include crowdsourcing, software tools and collaborative initiatives, applying metadata standards yet to be established and adopted. |
| Academic Authors Letter to Judge Chin Feb 2012 (Samuelson) Posted: 20 Feb 2012 01:08 PM PST www.scribd.com "The signatories to this letter are academic authors whose works of authorship are typical of thebooks and other works found in the collections of major research libraries such as those of theUniversity of Michigan and others of Google’s library partners. We write scholarly works on aregular basis. Our primary motivation in preparing these works is to share the knowledge wehave cultivated with other scholars and interested members of the public. Although we are notindifferent to revenue streams we receive from books that we publish, the main reward we wishto attain from our intellectual labors is the satisfaction of contributing to the ongoing dialogueabout issues of concern to us and, perhaps as an added bonus, a reputation for excellence inscholarship among our peers. A number of us have made some or all of our academic work available on an open access basis through Creative Commons licenses and the like.... It bears mentioning thatdespite our having raised numerous objections and concerns about the proposed settlement in avery public way by putting them in the court record, none of us has been contacted by theproposed class representatives, the Authors Guild, or the lawyers who want to be designated asclass counsel to ask for our opinion about what our interests are, whether to pursue this litigation,what relief to seek, on what terms to settle it, or anything else....This lack of communication reinforces our concerns that the proposed class representatives andthe Authors Guild are not adequately representing the interests of academic authors at this juncture. Most significantly, their decision to continue the litigation shows that they do not shareacademic values, goals or objectives. None of us would have initiated a lawsuit against Googlefor copyright infringement in the first place because it scanned our and other academic authors’books for purposes of indexing their contents and serving up snippets in response to searchqueries.... By pursuing this lawsuit as a class action in the aftermath of the failure of theproposed settlement and not reaching a new settlement, we believe that the proposed classrepresentatives and the associational plaintiff in this case are engaged in actions that areantithetical to the interests of academic authors...." |
| ("open access" OR "open data") (research OR science OR scholarship) Posted: 20 Feb 2012 01:02 PM PST plus.google.com Discussions of current open access news, issues, and developments can be found on Google+. Follow discussion threads or join in and add your own comments. |
| Academics Object to Class Certification in Google Books Case Posted: 20 Feb 2012 01:01 PM PST The Digital Shift, (16 Feb 2012) "University of California, Berkeley, law professor Pamela Samuelson, on behalf of more than 80 academics, sent a letter on Monday to Judge Denny Chin asserting that academic authors should not be included as part of a class authorization in the high profile Google Books case, due to fundamental disagreements between the interests of academics and other types of authors....In their recent motion for class certification, the Authors Guild and other plaintiffs are looking to certify the authors of millions of different books as a single class for the purposes of the lawsuit. Google filed a brief [PDF] in opposition to the certification on February 8, pointing out that not all authors share the plaintiffs’ views: “Most authors affirmatively approve of the inclusion of their books in snippet view….Academic authors, in particular, say that they receive other benefits from Google Books, both individual and communal.” To support the claim, the brief quotes a previous January 2010 letter [PDF] from Samuelson to Judge Chin, which she wrote on behalf of more than 60 academics. She wrote that “indexes and snippets advance scholarly research and improve access to knowledge, especially when, as with [Google Book Search], searches yield links to libraries from which the relevant books can be obtained.” In Judge Chin’s rejection of a settlement in the Google Books case last March, he...quoted directly from the January 2010 letter he’d received from Samuelson, which, like the most recent letter, highlighted the differences between academics and other authors: “Academic authors, almost by definition, are committed to maximizing access to knowledge. The [Authors] Guild and the [Association of American Publishers], by contrast, are institutionally committed to maximizing profits.” ..." |
| Announcing the Open Definition Licenses Service Posted: 20 Feb 2012 12:53 PM PST Open Knowledge Foundation Blog, (16 Feb 2012) "We’re pleased to announce a simple new service from the Open Knowledge Foundation as part of the Open Definition Project: the (Open) Licenses Service....The service is ultra simple in purpose and function. It provides: [1] Information on licenses for open data, open content, and open-source software in machine readable form (JSON), [2] A simple web API that allows you retrieve this information over the web — including using javascript in a browser via JSONP....There’s data on more than 100 open (and a few closed) licenses including all OSI-approved open source licenses and all Open Definition conformant open data and content licenses. Also included are a few closed licenses as well as ‘generics’ — licensed representing a category (useful where a user does not know the exact license but knows, for example, that the material only requires attribution)...." |
| The Research Works Act: a comment Posted: 20 Feb 2012 10:30 AM PST Genome Biology 13 (2), (20 Feb 2012) "Looking into the US from the other side of the Atlantic, Federal funding for scientific research can only be viewed through a green mist of envy. The contribution of these funds to global science is remarkable (just take a look at a list of Nobel Prize winners, and note how many institutional affiliations are in the US), and is a record of which US tax payers should be justly proud. This contribution is not paralleled by any other government. Furthermore, efforts by funding agencies to make the benefits of research as widely available as possible - including to those outside the US - are laudable. It seems to be a truism that maximizing access to the results of scientific endeavor is in the best interests of further scientific progress, and so offers the best value to the taxpayer. So why would the representatives of the very same taxpayer seek to restrict access to this research, and by the same measure subsidize the publishing industry with money diverted away from scientists? It defies belief to imagine that these Congressmen are arguing for their constituents to pay exorbitant prices simply to read articles that they themselves have paid for with their tax dollars. So what is the defense? Supporters of RWA pitch it as a battle for the free market; in the words of the Association of American Publishers, its motivation is the 'freedom from regulatory interference for [the] private sector'. Of course, this is quite the opposite of what RWA actually represents, which is additional government regulation....In fact, market forces scare traditional publishing models, because left to their own devices they will arrive at the most efficient use of capital, which is undoubtedly, for the funding agencies, open access....Given that Federal funding ultimately pays for both access to publications and publishing costs, the best value option is an open access model....To prevent Federal agencies from pursuing what is therefore a no-brainer option, RWA is designed to skew the market....No freely operating market would tolerate those paying for the product (the taxpayers) being barred from access to its benefits...." |
| Posted: 20 Feb 2012 10:06 AM PST petermr's blog, (20 Feb 2012) "Today we have launched @ccess – a new site, and more importantly a new community – to make scholarly information REALLY LIBRE available....By LIBRE we ean free to use, re-use, and redistribute for any purpose. It’s covered by the Open Knowledge Definitions and the actual text of the Budapest Declaration on Open Access 10 years ago....Anyone can be a member of this effort – you just need passion and energy and a need to provide LIBRE resources. And if you have a story about how and why you need LIBRE material and can’t get it , then highlight it on the mailing list or help populate the questions on the wiki...." |
| Posted: 20 Feb 2012 09:49 AM PST conference.ifla.org "Theme: Promoting global access to law: developing an open access index for official authenticated legal information. Part 2: Europe....The IFLA Law Libraries Section...is seeking proposals for papers to be presented at a two-hour program to be held at the IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Helsinki, Finland in August 2012. Last year in Puerto Rico Part 1 focused on the Caribbean, Central and South American. This year the focus will be on new democracies examining their level of government transparency, with a special focus on their legal systems, e.g., Estonia, Lithuania, Finland, the Scandinavian countries, and others. Our Section’s interest to promote access to free legal information as a basic human right involves learning from our colleagues how their jurisdictions have tackled the provision of authoritative sources of legal information authenticated by their governments...." |
| Posted: 20 Feb 2012 09:44 AM PST Archivalia, (19 Feb 2012) [After summarizing evidence that Greener Journals published an article previously published elsewhere:] Pure plagiarism or indication of personal connections between the two publishers? I cannot find any evidence on the websites that it is allowed to the publisher on the ground of a copyright transfer or a contract to re-use the arcticle. (And this would only work under the premise that the publisher of Academic Journals and Greener Journals is the same.) Now we have to examine if the CC license allows this dubious re-use of an old OA article. It is clear what the intention of Greener Journals is: By copying the PDF from Academic Journals (omitting the date of the acceptance 10, August 2006 and changing the copyright notice) the very small contents of the Greener Journal Archives are enriched by a good article of a serious US scientist. Obviously this practice is highly misleading and unethical - but it is legal according the CC terms? ..." |
| The Open-Access Movement Reaches a New Low: Greener Journals Posted: 20 Feb 2012 09:40 AM PST Scholarly Open Access, (18 Feb 2012) "Greener Journals is a scholarly open-access publisher based in Lagos, Nigeria. The firm publishes twenty open access journals....The publisher doesn’t seem to understand the difference between a publisher and a journal: “Greener Journals (GJ) is an open access journal [sic] that provides rapid publication (monthly) of articles in all areas of the subject [sic].” A link on the publisher’s main page leads to another page that describes open access publishing. Much of the text on that page is lifted from other websites....Few of the journals have any content, and those that do have only a very few articles. This publisher began operations in 2011. Below is a list of Greener Journals’ journal portfolio. I cannot understand why any serious researcher would pay to have their scholarly articles published by this ridiculous publisher...." |
| Aaron Swartz Hacks the Attention Economy - Technology Review Posted: 20 Feb 2012 08:17 AM PST www.technologyreview.com "For Aaron Swartz, sharing files on the Internet isn't just fun and profitable. It's existential. The 25-year-old programmer faces criminal charges that he hacked into MIT's computer system and downloaded 4.8 million journal articles with the intent of posting them online. He pleaded not guilty, but according to a manifesto he penned in 2008 it is precisely such acts of online civil disobedience that are needed to bring rampant Internet file sharing "into the light" and challenge "unjust laws." ..." |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Connotea: Bookmarks matching tag oa.new To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment