E-LIS : the Open Archive for Library and Information Science

Founded in 2003, E-LIS is an open access archive for library and information studies. It is free for searching and depositing. E-LIS is hosted by the CILEA group in Italy, and managed by an international group of volunteer editors from over 45 countries. The archive supports 22 languages

Freedom for scholarship in the internet age

Discusses the purpose of scholarship, the potential of the internet to further the purposes of scholarship, and the role of librarians in transformative change in scholarly communication. Addresses the rapidly growing volume of information, and discusses three approaches to coping; writing less and collaborating are recommended. Talks about the work of librarians in scholarly communication as the basis for opening up conversation on broader change. Presents evidence that a fully open access scholarly journal publishing system would be possible at much lower cost than libraries are currently paying

Democracy v the Government of Canada: the muzzling of government scientists, librarians & archivists and the growing movement for communication rights in Canada

A number of writers have discussed the potential of advanced media technologies to support a more inclusive, democratic society that prioritizes values such as community and the social good. Enzensberger points out that we cannot assume that the potential of the technology will simply unfold on its own in a capitalist society. This discussion paper is designed to invite participation to share experiences of recent muzzling of Canadian government scientists, librarians and archivists and advocacy strategeis for communication rights to support democracy in Canada

Enclosure and open access in communication scholarship

The current state of scholarly communication is one of contest between an increasingly commercial system that is dysfunctional and incompatible with the basic aims of scholarship, and emerging alternatives, particularly open access publishing and open access archiving. Two approaches to facilitating global participation in scholarly communication are contrasted in this paper; equity is seen as a superior goal to the donor model, which requires poverty or inequity to succeed. The current state of scholarly communication within the discipline of communication is examined. Journal publishing in communication shows a greater diversity of ownership and less commercial concentration than scholarly publishing overall; this, and the at least 76 fully open access journals in this area suggest strong potential for emancipating scholarship in communication from commercial imperatives. Specific sites of struggle and actions for scholars, including developing open access journals and self-archiving, are presented

Open Content Alliance (OCA) vs. Google Books: OCA as superior network and better fit for an emerging global public sphere

The Open Content Alliance (OCA) is a network of libraries and similar organizations committed to digitizing and providing broadest possible access to books and other materials; over 1.6 million books are already online under OCA principles. OCA is analyzed in contrast with Google Books (as per the preliminary Google Books Settlement, November 2009), using Castell’s network theory and theories of an emerging global public sphere, based on the work of Habermas and Fraser. OCA is seen as a superior network to Google Books, with particular strengths in connectedness, consistency (shared goals), flexibility, scalability, survivability, networking (inclusion / exclusion) power, and network-making power, including the ability to form strategic alliances. The lawsuit against Google Books, and the settlement, illustrate some of the limitations of Google Books as a network, for example the lawsuit per se is a challenge to Google Books’ rights to make decisions on inclusion and exclusion, and illustrates poor connectedness and consistency, two attributes Castells points to as essential to the performance of a network. The respectful, law-abiding approach of OCA is a good fit for a global public sphere, while the Google Books Settlement takes a key issue that has traditionally been decided by governments (orphan books), and brings the decision-making power into private contract negotiations, diminishing democracy. The current Google Books Settlement is fractured on a national (geographic) basis; consequences could include decreased understanding of the rest of the world by a leading nation, the U.S. This works against the development of a global public sphere, and has potential negative economic and security implications for the U.S.. OCA is presented as one node of an emerging library network for the global public sphere, a global public good increasing access to knowledge everywhere, increasing the potential for informed public debate towards global consensus

Freedom for scholarship in the internet age

Begins with some thoughts on the purpose of scholarship. This question should frame any discussion of scholarly communication. While there are millions of researchers and at least as many research questions, it can be useful to think about a question like addressing global warming when evaluating potential change in scholarly communication. Note that it is important to remember that there can be a signficant gap in time (sometimes centuries) between when a concept is introduced, and when it is understood. From the scholar\u27s perspective, publisher-added digital rights management (DRM) is seen as a hindrance to scholarship - not a value add. Libre open access - free to re-use as well as to read - is only a small fraction of open access right now, but it is predicted that libre OA will be increasingly sought by scholars who experience its benefits. Dealing with the sheer volume of information presently available (and still expanding exponentially) is one of the key challenges for scholars, librarians, and publishers alike. Three strategies for addressing this challenge are discussed. Reading less or filtering is seen as tempting, but not a good idea when examined against the purpose of scholarship. For example, if we find the volume of information coming from China overwhelming, it might be tempted to skip reading it; but if Chinese scholars are doing research that could help us to figure out a clean energy breakthrough, this isn\u27t such a good idea. Writing less is a strategy that has more potential. Some of the pressure to write in quantity in academia may actually be counterproductive. Collaborating is a strategy well worth pursuing. To understand why, first picture the physics article with a thousand authors. Then picture another discipline, where a thousand authors each write one article. Current tenure and promotion procedures do not reward collaboration. While there is much to be said for tradition in academia, there are times when tradition needs to be reexamined for the benefit of scholarship; and this is one of these times. Changing tenure and promotion procedures is not easy, nor is it the mandate of librarians; but I would argue that the good work librarians have done in the area of scholarly communication have opened a window for scholars to begin these broader discussions. The window of opportunity is briefly discussed, from the identification of the serials crisis to the campaign to create change, to the exciting changes we see all around us - over 4,700 journals in DOAJ, more than 1,500 repositories in OpenDOAR, over 150 open access mandate policies, more than 22 million free publications through BASE. What is really amazing about all this change is that it has taken place with virtually no resources. Evidence that there is more than sufficient funds, from academic library subscription budgets alone, to not only fund a fully open access scholarly publishing system, but save lots of money at the same time, is presented (a John Houghton slide on cost implications for a switch to OA for the UK Higher Education, and two of my slides on a global shift to OA by academic libraries). The reasons why savings and not just status quo costs are needed are mentioned briefly, e.g. the need to move into support for open data and e-science, and address preservation of electronic information. Next steps for libraries are presented, including keeping up the good work in building and filling repositories, hosting open access journals, and education on scholarly communication and open access. Consider setting up an open access author\u27s fund, or transforming licensing language to reflect a shift in purchase (from subscription to subscription / full OA for our authors), and other means of economic support for open access. Many thanks to OCULA and especially to OCULA President Nathalie Soini for the invitation to speak at OLA. I hope to find time to elaborate on some of the topics from this speech in more depth at a later date

SCOAP3: a key library leadership opportunity in the transition to open access

The SCOAP3 consortium aims to transition the whole of High Energy Physics (HEP) publishing from a subscription to an open access basis. SCOAP3 currently has commitments for more than 63% of the projected 10 million Euros per year budget, from partners in more than 21 countries, including more than 50 libraries and consortia in the U.S. Full participation from the U.S., a leader in HEP research, is both essential and particularly challenging, as the U.S. does not have a national coordinating body that can make one commitment for the country, as many other countries do. While the work to undertake this commitment for the library should not be underestimated - figuring out subscription costs when journals are part of a big deal, often through a consortium - neither should the benefits be underestimated. In brief, the benefits are the optimum access that comes with open access - full open access to the publisher\u27s PDF for everyone, everywhere; a model for transitioning to open access that involves no financial risk, as commitments are capped at current subscriptions expenditures, and SCOAP3 is addressing the issue of unbundling successful journals from big deals and reducing costs accordingly; future financial benefits as a transparent, production-based pricing model for scholarly communication introduces competition into a market where it has been lacking; gaining publisher acceptance of library advocacy efforts for open access by addressing a key concern of publishers (financing the journals in an open access environment) and perhaps most importantly, establishing a leadership role for libraries in a future for scholarly communication that will be largely open access. As Douglas (2009) explains, "To move forward in achieving open access, U.S. libraries that subscribe to any of the five journals that are considered 100 percent convertible to SCOAP3 (European Physical Journal C, Journal of High Energy Physics, Nuclear Physics B, Physical Review D, and Physics Letters B) need to participate". If this describes your library, please go to the SCOAP3 website, now, to learn more and participate in this innovative global collaboration that can be a model, not only for transitioning to open access, but also for how humankind can work cooperatively across borders to accomplish a great good that will benefit all of us

Creative commons and open access to scholarly works: common myths about an imperfect match

Adequate licensing and attribution of scholarly work in the digital age have presented many issues for scholarly and publishing communities. While many open access advocates consider Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) to be consistent with the strongest form of open access as it includes the least restrictions, Heather Morrison compares the various CC licenses and argues that the lack of restrictions of CC-BY actually leaves open access vulnerable and other options should be explored

Open Access, Authors' Rights and the Commons

Open Access (OA) is beginning to open up interesting conversation about scholarship and copyright. There are already more than 3,300 fully open access, peer-reviewed scholarly journals listed in DOAJ, many millions of items available in open access archives. Research funders, universities and faculty themselves are requiring OA. A traditional copyright transfer agreement in which all rights are assigned by the author to the publisher, does not make sense in this environment. Most publishers are modifying how they work with authors. One approach is a more liberal copyright policy, which leaves some rights with the author. Some publishers use a license to publish approach, leaving copyright with the author and clarifying rights to publish. Many authors are negotiating copyright, whether individually or through the use of Authors' Addenda. Some publishers and authors are using Creative Commons licenses

E-LIS : the Open Archive for Library and Information Science

Founded in 2003, E-LIS is an open access archive for library and information studies. It is free for searching and depositing. E-LIS is hosted by the CILEA group in Italy, and managed by an international group of volunteer editors from over 45 countries. The archive supports 22 languages