1. Restricted vs. open access to ETDs A problem for public science
J. Schöpfel, H.Prost, M.Piotrowski
GERiiCO, University of Lille 3
E.R. Hilf, T. Severiens, P. Grabbe
Institute for Science Networking, Oldenburg
ETD Leicester July 24

2. Evidence ( )

3. Typologies of restricted access
Limited availability
Access via login and password
On-campus (intranet) or off-campus (internet)
Embargo
Delayed access
From 6 months to 5 years (or more)
No access
Confidentiality (copyright protection)
Metadata without full text

4. The French-German survey (2009-2012)
Increase from 12% to 24% of all PHD
Increase from 5% to 28% of all ETD
No ETD in 2009
7% of ETD in 2012
Stable
2% of all ETD
Increase from 41% to 47% of all PHD
No limited access
No embargo
Less than 1% of all ETD

5. University presidency
PHD student
Jury
Colleagues
Graduate school
Academic library
University presidency
Service provider
National library
Publisher
The decision making
People & institutions

6. SPARC adapted Reader Rights Reuse Rights
Free readership rights immediately upon posting
Free readership rights after 6 months embargo
Free readership rights after 12+ months embargo
Free readership rights only on-campus (Intranet)
Total embargo (confidentiality)
Reuse Rights
Generous reuse & remixing rights (CC-BY license)
Reuse, remixing & further building upon the work subject to certain restrictions & conditions (CC BY-NC & other CC licenses)
Reuse (no remixing or further building upon the work) subject to certain restrictions and conditions
No reuse rights beyond fair use/limitations & exceptions to copyright (all rights reserved copyright)
SPARC adapted

7. Copyrights Institution Policy
No third party claim
Third party requires embargo
Third party claims full IP protection (confidentiality, privacy)
Institution Rights
Obligation of free dissemination
Obligation of dissemination with restrictions (campus)
No institution rights
Institution Policy
OA mandat
Institutional repository
OA support
Interest for OA
No OA policy

8. Posting Workflow Machine Readability
No embargo option available in workflow, embargo needs special procedure
Opt-out if claim for embargo
Opt-in for free dissemination
Machine Readability
Full text, metadata, citations & data, incl supplementary data , provided in community machine-readable standard formats through a community standard API or protocol
Full text, metadata, citations & data, incl supplementary data may be crawled or accessed through a community standard API or protocol
Full text, metadata & citations may be crawled without special permission or registration
Full text, metadata & citations may be crawled with permission
Full text & metadata not available in machine-readable format

9. Why Roles of Contradiction
the development of digital infrastructure and open access produce fears and whishes for secrecy
this contradiction between willingness for open access but lack of knowledge
Why
the workflow
the legal environment
the tradition
Roles of

10. Stagnation in OA for ETD opens Questions
Why the demands for keeping the document not open to the public for fear of copyright infringement are increasing ?
Is there increasing pressure of commercial publishers to not allow OA distribution if a book is planned?
Are there more recent other ways of posting an ETD in OA which are not counted by the institutional repository network?

11. To develop practical and helpful guidelines and recommendations
Project ETD4OA
To produce and disseminate reliable and consistent empirical data on the processing of ETD
To build a sustainable European community focussing on the open access to ETD
To contribute to the development of the acceptance and usage of open access ETD infrastructures, by the research communities, by industry and business and by the Internet community
To develop practical and helpful guidelines and recommendations

12. Five work packages Dissemination and communication Policy coordination
Strategy development
Policy coordination
Mapping of ETD initiatives and data for decision
Monitoring uptake
Usage and acceptance
Outreach
Community building
Project management

13. The project members

14. Questions ? joachim.schopfel@univ-lille3.fr
Thank you
Questions ?
Acknowledgement: This paper has been prepared with funding support from the European Institute of Social Sciences and Humanities (MESHS–USR 3185), Lille, France