1. Open access policies: An overview. Copyright management Iryna Kuchma, eIFL Open Access program manager, eIFL.net Presented at Open Access: Maximising Research Quality and Impact workshop, October 22, 2009, the University of Latvia

2. Drivers Knowledge economy E-science, E-research, Virtual Learning Environment Accountability and Assessment Freedom of information Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (based on Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director: http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

3. Lisbon Agenda In March 2000, the EU Heads of States and Governments agreed their aim to make the EU ‘the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-driven economy by 2010’. Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

4. Lisbon Agenda 2 One of the key strategic means of achieving this goal was identified as ‘preparing the transition to a knowledge-based economy and society by better policies for the information society and R&D…’ and specifically increasing investment in R&D to 3% of GDP Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

5. Lisbon Agenda 3 In a post-industrial economy there is increasing acknowledgement of the relationship between: Investment in R&D Access to knowledge Technology transfer Wealth creation Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

6. European Commission EC pilot launched in August 2008 to give OA to results from approximately 20% of projects from the 7 th Research Framework Programme (FP7) - especially in health, energy, environment, social sciences and information and communication technologies. Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

7. European Commission 2 Grantees required to: deposit peer reviewed research articles or final manuscripts resulting from their FP7 projects into an online repository, with either six or twelve month embargo (depending on subject area) Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

8. ERC In December 2007 the The European Research Council (ERC) issued Guidelines for Open AccessGuidelines for Open Access and the ERC Scientific Council has established the following interim position on open access: All peer-reviewed publications from ERC-funded research projects be deposited on publication into an appropriate research repository where available and subsequently made Open Access within 6 months of publication. Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

9. ERC 2 The ERC is keenly aware of the desirability to shorten the period between publication and open access beyond the currently accepted standard of 6 months Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

10. EUROHORCs All the major public funding agencies in 23 European countries23 European countries are members of European Heads of Research Councils (EUROHORCs) In May 2008 the General Assembly of EUROHORCs agreed to recommend a minimal standardrecommend regarding Open Access to its Member Organisations. The proposed minimal standard is an intermediate step towards a system in which free access to all scientific information is guaranteed without jeopardizing the system of peer review, quality control, and long-term preservation. Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

11. EUROHORCs 2 It encourages its members to reduce embargo time to not more than six months and later to zero. All MOs of EUROHORCs should sign the Berlin Declaration on Open Access (2003). … all scientists, either funded by or doing research for MOs, should be informed about the already existing mechanisms for Open Access and strongly advised to make use of them. Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

12. Berlin Declaration ‘Our mission of disseminating knowledge is only half complete if the information is not made widely and readily available to society.’ Signatories should promote open access by encouraging researchers/grant recipients to publish in open access. encouraging the holders of cultural heritage to support open access by providing their resources on the Internet. http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.html http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.html Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

13. Berlin Declaration 2 developing means to evaluate open access contributions and online-journals in order to maintain the standards of quality assurance and good scientific practice. advocating that open access publication be recognized in promotion and tenure evaluation. Open Access Policies: An Overview by D ( from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

14. Berlin Declaration 3 Issued on 22 nd October 2003 260 signatories world-wide, including funding bodies and institutions http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess- berlin/berlindeclaration.html Open Access Policies: An Overview by D (from Open Access Policies: An Overview by David Prosser, SPARC Europe Director : http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser ) http://www.eifl.net/cps/sections/services/eifl-oa/training/2009-nepal/10-david-prosser

15. OA policy options Open access policy options for funding agencies and universities (Based on The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #130 and The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #127, by Peter Suber: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/02-02- 09.htm http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/02-02- 09.htm and http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/11-02- 08.htm)http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/11-02- 08.htm

16. Request or require? Recommendation: If you're serious about achieving open access for the research you fund, you must require it.

17. Green or gold? Recommendation: If you decide to request and encourage open access, rather than a mandate it, then you can encourage submission to an open access journal and encourage deposit in an open access repository as well, especially when researchers publish in a toll access journal.

18. Green or gold? 2 Recommendation: But if you decide to mandate open access, then you should require deposit in an open access repository, and not require submission to an open access journal, even if you also encourage submission to an open access journal.

19. Deposit what? Recommendation: Require the deposit of the final version of the author's peer-reviewed manuscript, not the published version. Require the deposit of data generated by the funded research project. In medicine and the social sciences, where privacy is an issue, open access data should be anonymised. A peer-reviewed manuscript in an open access repository should include a citation and link to the published edition.

20. Deposit what? 2 Recommendation: Allow the deposit of unrefereed preprints, previous journal articles, conference presentations (slides, text, audio, video), book manuscripts, book metadata (especially when the author cannot or will not deposit the full-text), and the contents of journals edited or published on campus. The university itself could consider other categories as well, such as open courseware, administrative records, and digitization projects from the library, theses and dissertations

21. Scope of policy? Recommendation: For simplicity and enforceability, follow the example of most funding agencies: apply your open access policy to research you fund "in whole or in part"

22. What embargo? Recommendation: No more than six months. Any embargo is a compromise with the public interest; even when they are justified compromises, the shorter they are, the better.

23. What exceptions? Recommendation: Exempt private notes and records not intended for publication. Exempt classified research. Either exempt patentable discoveries or allow an embargo long enough for the researcher to apply for a patent. (This could be a special embargo not allowed to other research.) And unless you fund research, which often results in royalty-producing books, exempt royalty-producing books.

35. Thanks to the SHERPA Team Especially Peter Millington, Technical Development Officer for the slides

36. Managing rights for OA As content producers (responsible for licensing- out), universities need to deal with ownership of rights in material produced by academics, researchers etc: rights to be granted to others publishers; users and re-users

45. Permissions

46. Copyright Management Ensuring that your IR team liaising with the author is informed and up-to-date on self-archiving and related publisher policies Utilising and monitoring tools such as Sherpa/RoMEO to support you in your information. f. Liaising with publishers on a case by case basis if time and resources allow From Proudman, V. (2007) The population of repositories. In Eds. K. Weenink, L.Waaijers and K. van Godtsenhoven, A DRIVER's Guide to European Repositories (pp.49 - 101)

48. Repository Deposit License ensures that depositors own copyright in the material they are depositing or have permission from the copyright owner to deposit; and grants to the repository the necessary rights to make the material available to end-users (from A Guide to Developing Open Access Through Your Digital Repository by Kylie Pappalardo and Dr Anne Fitzgerald, Open Access to Knowledge Law Project: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00009671/01/9671.pdf)http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00009671/01/9671.pdf

49. Author Distribution Agreement Do you want to provide a facility to enable authors to enter into an Author Distribution Agreement with end-users, for example by attaching a Creative Commons license to their work? Require end-users to agree (through a click-wrap agreement) to the terms of the Author Distribution Agreement or the Repository Distribution (End-User) Agreement (from A Guide to Developing Open Access Through Your Digital Repository by Kylie Pappalardo and Dr Anne Fitzgerald, Open Access to Knowledge Law Project: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00009671/01/9671.pdf)http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00009671/01/9671.pdf

50. Creative Commons

76. FAQ Is open access compatible with copyright? Completely. Copyright law gives the copyright holder the right to make access open or restricted, and we seek to put copyright in the hands of authors or institutions that will consent to make access open. (From the Budapest Open Access Initiative: Frequently Asked Questions http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/boaifaq.htm) http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/boaifaq.htm

77. FAQ 2 If articles are easily available, then plagiarism will be made easier? On the contrary. Open access might make plagiarism easier to commit, for people trolling for text to cut and paste. But for the same reason, open access makes plagiarism more hazardous to commit. Insofar as open access makes plagiarism easier, it's only for plagiarism from open access sources. But plagiarism from open access sources is the easiest kind to detect.” (From Open access and quality written by Peter Suber, SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #102, October 2, 2006: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/10-02-06.htm#quality) http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/10-02-06.htm#quality

78. FAQ 3 “In fact, plagiarism is diminished as a problem. It is far easier to detect if the original, date-stamped material is freely accessible to all, rather than being hidden in an obscure journal.” (From the Open Access Frequently Asked Questions, DRIVER — Digital Repository Infrastructure Vision for European Research http://www.driver- support.eu/faq/oafaq.html)http://www.driver- support.eu/faq/oafaq.html

79. FAQ 4 “It is easier to detect simple plagiarism with electronic than with printed text by using search engines or other services to find identical texts. For more subtle forms of misuse, the difficulties of detection are no greater than with traditional journal articles. Indeed, metadata tagging, including new ways of tracking the provenance of electronic data and text, promise to make it easier.” (From JISC Opening up Access to Research Results: Questions and Answers, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/QandA-Doc-final.pdf) http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/QandA-Doc-final.pdf

80. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/plagiarism/archive/detection.aspx

81. Thank you! Questions? Iryna Kuchma iryna.kuchma[at]eifl.net; www.eifl.netwww.eifl.net The presentation is licensed with Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License