November 23, 2009
John
Willinsky
When Scholarly Publishers Reduce Author Rights in the Face of Open Access Initiatives
by John Willinsky
November 23, 2009
It is bound to happen. In trying to move an idea like open access (to research and scholarship) forward, you can reach a point where it seems that such efforts are contributing to the problem, rather than being part of the solution. It would be overstating it to observe that when Moses demanded, “Let my people go,” in ancient Egypt, the Pharaoh's heart only hardened. Let me just say that at times just before the dawn, there can appear to be little hope of light.
Or so it seemed to me, when the editor at Educational Theory emailed me with the new author archiving policy for his Wiley-Blackwell journal. He had negotiated these changes to Wiley-Blackwell policy on author rights to post a copy of their article in an open access archive, following my submission of an author’s addendum to the journal’s copyright agreement after they accepted an article of mine (as part of a symposium of papers on Derrida). With the addendum, I had granted Stanford a non-exclusive right to post my final draft in an open access archive, as we at Stanford University's School of Education had voted to do in support of an Open Access Policy in 2008.
Wiley-Blackwell had originally advised Educational Theory that the terms of the addendum were unacceptable. Yet Wiley-Blackwell also had a policy that those journals, among its nearly 1,500 titles, which were published on behalf of scholarly societies, could set their own archiving terms.
The editor of Educational Theory set out to do just that, and his email cited Wiley-Blackwell’s new terms. These terms permit an author to post a final (peer-reviewed) draft on acceptance of the article, which is good news. However, the author must then remove that copy, the moment the article is published (“Once the journal publishes, you must remove the article,” the terms read) for a period of six months.
This does reduce Wiley-Blackwell's standard embargo period for posting drafts from 12 months to six, as well as allowing one to post the final draft prior to publication. (And rather than “remove” the article, one could close off online access to the copy, retain the bibliographic information, and deploy the “Request Eprint” button that Eprints.org and DSpace archive software make available.) Still, to allow an author to post a copy in advance of publication and then to ask the author to remove it for half-a-year, seemingly on the day it is published, is a troubling victory.
It not only adds to the administrative burden of making the work freely available, but it also invites violation terms of the agreement (when exactly is the work published?). More than that, it seems to exercise undue control over the intellectual state of this property prior to a significant investment by the publisher compared to that of author and reviewer.
I understand that this is seen as necessary to protect the publisher’s interests, but it has not been shown that archives of final drafts pose a threat to subscriptions. What has been shown is that they support author interests (insofar as authors are interested in being read as widely as possible, as well as being cited, which also serves research more broadly).
Just as discouraging is how this “remove the article” clause makes a hash of the open access archive. Archives are not supposed to be places in which an article is available one day and gone the next, if only for a six-month period. The remove clause appears to be another convoluted variation in publisher efforts to protect their return from trafficking in this public good (a concept on which Peter Suber has recently provided a brilliant exposition).
Click image to enlarge it.
This latest measure by Wiley-Blackwell recalls the Ptolemaic geocentric model in which the heavenly object orbit the earth. This model was propped up over time by the addition of explanatory epicycle after epicycle, until the unwieldy structure simply toppled in the face of the straightforward heliocentric system, first advanced by Copernicus. So, too, publisher-centric intellectual-property acrobatics will also pass. But how many more epicycles will it take? Well, one more caught my eye within Wiley-Blackwell’s copyright terms for off-prints.
Not so long ago, publishers would send authors a set of fine off-prints for sharing with students, colleagues, and those who requested a copy, often using preprinted postcards that often carried exotic stamps. Today, authors publishing with Wiley-Blackwell can share no more than the final draft of their article, which, if it can be cited, cannot be reliably quoted.
I am left, then, with this question of how many more epicycles will it take before the larger academic community recognizes that the earth is turning, and that such turning accounts for the spread of light across the land.
It is bound to happen. In trying to move an idea like open access (to research and scholarship) forward, you can reach a point where it seems that such efforts are contributing to the problem, rather than being part of the solution. It would be overstating it to observe that when Moses demanded, “Let my people go,” in ancient Egypt, the Pharaoh's heart only hardened. Let me just say that at times just before the dawn, there can appear to be little hope of light.
Or so it seemed to me, when the editor at Educational Theory emailed me with the new author archiving policy for his Wiley-Blackwell journal. He had negotiated these changes to Wiley-Blackwell policy on author rights to post a copy of their article in an open access archive, following my submission of an author’s addendum to the journal’s copyright agreement after they accepted an article of mine (as part of a symposium of papers on Derrida). With the addendum, I had granted Stanford a non-exclusive right to post my final draft in an open access archive, as we at Stanford University's School of Education had voted to do in support of an Open Access Policy in 2008.
Wiley-Blackwell had originally advised Educational Theory that the terms of the addendum were unacceptable. Yet Wiley-Blackwell also had a policy that those journals, among its nearly 1,500 titles, which were published on behalf of scholarly societies, could set their own archiving terms.
The editor of Educational Theory set out to do just that, and his email cited Wiley-Blackwell’s new terms. These terms permit an author to post a final (peer-reviewed) draft on acceptance of the article, which is good news. However, the author must then remove that copy, the moment the article is published (“Once the journal publishes, you must remove the article,” the terms read) for a period of six months.
This does reduce Wiley-Blackwell's standard embargo period for posting drafts from 12 months to six, as well as allowing one to post the final draft prior to publication. (And rather than “remove” the article, one could close off online access to the copy, retain the bibliographic information, and deploy the “Request Eprint” button that Eprints.org and DSpace archive software make available.) Still, to allow an author to post a copy in advance of publication and then to ask the author to remove it for half-a-year, seemingly on the day it is published, is a troubling victory.
It not only adds to the administrative burden of making the work freely available, but it also invites violation terms of the agreement (when exactly is the work published?). More than that, it seems to exercise undue control over the intellectual state of this property prior to a significant investment by the publisher compared to that of author and reviewer.
I understand that this is seen as necessary to protect the publisher’s interests, but it has not been shown that archives of final drafts pose a threat to subscriptions. What has been shown is that they support author interests (insofar as authors are interested in being read as widely as possible, as well as being cited, which also serves research more broadly).
Just as discouraging is how this “remove the article” clause makes a hash of the open access archive. Archives are not supposed to be places in which an article is available one day and gone the next, if only for a six-month period. The remove clause appears to be another convoluted variation in publisher efforts to protect their return from trafficking in this public good (a concept on which Peter Suber has recently provided a brilliant exposition).
Click image to enlarge it.
This latest measure by Wiley-Blackwell recalls the Ptolemaic geocentric model in which the heavenly object orbit the earth. This model was propped up over time by the addition of explanatory epicycle after epicycle, until the unwieldy structure simply toppled in the face of the straightforward heliocentric system, first advanced by Copernicus. So, too, publisher-centric intellectual-property acrobatics will also pass. But how many more epicycles will it take? Well, one more caught my eye within Wiley-Blackwell’s copyright terms for off-prints.
Not so long ago, publishers would send authors a set of fine off-prints for sharing with students, colleagues, and those who requested a copy, often using preprinted postcards that often carried exotic stamps. Today, authors publishing with Wiley-Blackwell can share no more than the final draft of their article, which, if it can be cited, cannot be reliably quoted.
I am left, then, with this question of how many more epicycles will it take before the larger academic community recognizes that the earth is turning, and that such turning accounts for the spread of light across the land.
Respond: make a comment | read the 1 comment
Share: Email | Save as PDF | Print
| Bookmark & Share |
| 
More columns on Columns: Legal Publishing | from John Willinsky
|
the count:
8224 posts | 11403 comments
recent comments  
There is good leagal content that doesn’t necessarily come in the neat packages that we usually look in. Though our commercial legal database subscriptions have linked, vetted, edited, and easily. […] »»Research When you need to collaborate on a document displayed on your screen, it’s great to have a colleague from down the hall come into your office and look over your … »»Technology You should assess whether you can accept the financial risks associated with taking the matter, just as clients will assess whether they can (and will) pay your fee. Spend time at the beginning of the. […] »»Practice
-
Available online today are four new chapters of the publication Women in Canada: A Gender-based Statistical Report, which explores the socio-demographic and economic circumstances of Canadian women in general.
-
The bill amends the Constitution Act, 1867 by readjusting the number of members and the representation of the provinces in the House of Commons.
-
-
Blueseed plans to buy a ship and turn it into a floating incubator anchored in international waters off the coast of California.
-
Under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the flow of information out of Ottawa has slowed to a trickle.
-
-
"…the IPC has exclusive jurisdiction to decide whether a record is in the custody or control of a university in the context of an access request…"
-
-
John J.L. Hunter, Q.C. of Vancouver has been elected President for 2011-2012
-
Detailed results from 321 members.
These summaries of selected recent cases are provided each week to Slaw by Maritime Law Book.
More information.
-
Banks and Banking - Liability of banks to third parties - Negligence - General
The plaintiffs were the former shareholders of a company that failed. They sued the defendant bank alleging that it breached its contract with the company and the plaintiffs and breached a duty ...
-
Actions - Cause of action - General principles - New or extended cause of action - Opening of floodgates
The plaintiff and defendant worked at different branches of the same bank. The defendant’s common-law husband was the plaintiff’s ex-husband. Over a four year period, the defendant ...
-
Aliens - Definitions and general principles - Immigration consultants
The Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) had been designated as the sole regulatory body of immigration consultants in Canada from 2004 until June 2011. On June 30, 2011, Bill C-35 came into force, which significantly amended ...
-
Criminal Law - Sexual offences, public morals and disorderly conduct - Public morals - Obscenity - Possession of child pornography
The accused was convicted of making child pornography available and two counts of possession of child pornography (see [2010] Sask.R. Uned. 197). Subsequently, he was sentenced ...
-
Criminal Law - Procedure - Charge or directions - Jury or judge alone - Directions regarding pleas or evidence of witnesses, co-accused and accomplices
Rowe was convicted by a jury of five offences. He appealed.
The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed ...
-
Narcotic Control - Offences - Possession - General
The accused wished to access marijuana for medicinal purposes but did not have an authorization to possess marijuana issued under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations. He was notified that a package of marihuana addressed to him had been ...
-
Narcotic Control - General - Legislation - Exemptions - Medicinal marijuana
McCrady, who had an application pending under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR) to possess and grow marijuana, was convicted of possession of marijuana (Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA), s. 4(1)). Hearn pleaded guilty ...
-
Criminal Law - Sentence - Trafficking in hashish or marijuana (incl. possession for purposes of trafficking)
The accused pleaded guilty to one count of possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. He was sentenced to 30 days’ imprisonment to be served intermittently and 11 months’ ...
-
Municipal Law - Powers of municipalities - Particular powers - Imposition and collection of taxes or fees
Catalyst Paper Corp. operated a paper mill in the District of North Cowichan. Catalyst objected to the tax rate that it paid compared to residential ratepayers. In 2009, the ...
This is a listing of a few upcoming events in Canada of interest to lawyers, law students, legal librarians, and others involved in the practice of law.
Clicking on any event in the list below will give you access to more information and to links allowing you to see the full entry and to add the event to your own calendar.
Click this link for a fuller version of the TalkLaw/ParLoi calendar of events and for instructions as to how to add events and calendars to your own calendar.
|
Under the open access philosophy, Redalyc looks forward to contribute to the scientific editorial work produced in and about Iberoamerica, making available for the students and researchers the content of more then 550 magazines from different knowledge areas