Perspectives on Negotiating Licenses and Copyright

Transcription

1 Perspectives on Negotiating Licenses and Copyright John Ober Office of Scholarly Communication and California Digital Library University of California SPARC/ACRL Forum at ALA Midwinter January 21, 2006

2 Questions Is copyright the lynchpin?

3 Questions Is copyright the lynchpin? Role of publication agreements?

4 Questions Is copyright the lynchpin? Role of publication agreements? Incentives and motivation?

5 Questions Is copyright the lynchpin? Role of publication agreements? Incentives and motivation? Perspective a total copyright environment?

6 The Current Landscape Plateau of understanding (defensible benefits of retaining rights)

7 The Current Landscape Plateau of understanding (defensible benefits of retaining rights) Valley of tradition (transfer all rights)

8 The Current Landscape Mountains of implementation? Plateau of understanding (defensible benefits of retaining rights) Valley of tradition (transfer all rights)

9 Advancing the creation, dissemination, and preservation of knowledge a common philosophy But Question 1 can copyright be the practical lynchpin connecting scholars, universities, libraries, and publishers?

10 Faculty (some) Copyright retention (probably) dissemination options, which, when used (probably) use & impact, which (possibly) reward from my scholarship.

11 Libraries/librarians (some) Copyright retention is a precondition for new forms of dissemination, which (possibly) economic problems.

12 Libraries/librarians Faculty copyright retention is a precondition for us to help disseminate (manage, and preserve) our institution s scholarly output. (some) Faculty copyright retention is a precondition for new forms of dissemination, which (possibly) economic problems.

13 Encourage retention through addenda & new contracts

14

15

16 Deepen our contextual understanding e.g. Mellon-supported study, cf: CIBER studies 50% of UC faculty understand that copyright transfer may limit ability to post/use material elsewhere 66% of faculty think retaining copyright is important 18% have modified pub. agreements 8% have refused to sign b/c of rights issues 67% need to understand open access options Postprint Repository Services: Context and Feasibility at the University of California March, Available at

17 Deepen their contextual understanding

18 Assemble expertise

19 Tools and services

20 From: escholarship Subject: UC's escholarship Postprint Service Dear [UC Faculty Member], A postprint (electronic reprint) of your 2005 article(s) listed below may be eligible for submission to the University of California's escholarship Repository. * [Title], [Date], [Journal], [author1, author2,..]. An account has been established for you in the escholarship Repository, and we are pleased to announce that you may now assign a proxy to submit your postprint(s) for you. Depositing postprints increases readership of your work and those of UC faculty in general; we hope you will take a few minutes to post your eligible publications. Many previously published peer-reviewed articles can now be put into open access repositories like UC's because of the recent liberalization of publishers' policies. Click this link to activate your escholarship postprints account: &login=xxxx

21 escholarship Postprint solicitation ~ 8,000/yr (50% of UC s output) eligible by publisher policy ~ 7% response rate so far (1,100/15,000) ~ 45% of those rejected - impermissible use of publisher s version ~ 1,100 postprints since citation harvesting began (since April 05 covering articles) ~+20% increase in working paper deposits since citation harvesting began 2.4 million downloads of escholarship s 11,000 papers

22

23

24 Question 2 - In addition to addenda, what infrastructure is needed to support scholars management of their copyright? Contract addenda Expertise Tools & services Education & outreach

25 Additional infrastructure elements one-click deposit environment automated, invisible rights clearance advance/institutional negotiations with publishers partnerships in adding value to content without owning the content outright version control & relationships discovery services citation and impact metrics???

26 Question 3 incentives and motivation? Evidence after the fact is one thing

27

28 Question 3 incentives and motivation? Enticement is another thing altogether

29 Incentives and motivation

30 Incentives and motivation Faculty senate committee proposal: [UC] faculty shall routinely grant to [The Regents] a limited, irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive license to place the faculty member s scholarly work in a noncommercial open-access online repository. Part of a suite of papers under discussion for adoption at UC. Available at ml

31 Incentives and motivation Faculty senate committee proposal: [UC] faculty shall routinely grant to [The Regents] a limited, irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive license to place the faculty member s scholarly work in a noncommercial open-access online repository. In the event a faculty member assigns all or a part of the faculty member s copyright rights to a publisher as part of a publication agreement, the faculty member must retain the right to grant this license to the Regents. [continues with opt out clause] Part of a suite of papers under discussion for adoption at UC. Available at ml

32 Question 4 can we assemble a total copyright environment? Copyright mgmt & journal publishing

33