Implications of Copyright Evolution for the Future of Scholarly Communication and Grey Literature

UNSPECIFIED Implications of Copyright Evolution for the Future of Scholarly Communication and Grey Literature., 2006 (Unpublished) [Conference proceedings]

[thumbnail of GL8.pdf]
Preview
PDF
GL8.pdf

Download (134kB) | Preview

English abstract

Traditional practices regarding copyright are undergoing transformation. Although it is still common for scholars to give up their rights to their articles so that they will be published, this happens less frequently than it once did. Our analysis of the RoMEO database [1] shows that 75% of publishers allow authors to post their work in an online repository, whether that repository is hosted by their institution or on a personal web page. Whatever becomes of the open access movement to make all peer-reviewed journal articles immediately available online, copyright liberalization represents an enduring legacy of the open access movement. Online repositories are a more natural home for grey literature than open access journals. Repositories can store working papers and technical reports (among other content types) just as easily as peer-reviewed articles. Crucially, repositories can also store raw data, the grey content that lies at the root of much scholarly discovery. Copyright liberalization has encouraged the proliferation of such repositories; one prominent example is arXiv, which primarily serves physicists and computer scientists [2]. As scholarly discourse evolves, the preservation and promotion of grey content should command more energy than providing access to discrete grey literature.

Item type: Conference proceedings
Keywords: grey literature; scholarly communication; copyright
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BA. Use and impact of information.
B. Information use and sociology of information > BG. Information dissemination and diffusion.
Depositing user: Marcus Banks
Date deposited: 10 Aug 2007
Last modified: 02 Oct 2014 12:09
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/10198

References

1. SHERPA/RoMEO-Publisher copyright policies & self-archiving. http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php [Accessed 11 November 2006].

2. arXiv.og e-Print archive. http://arxiv.org/ [Accessed 11 November 2006].

3. Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing. http://www.earlham.edu/%7Epeters/fos/bethesda.htm [Accessed 11 November 2006].

4. Eysenbach G. (2006), Citation advantage of open access articles. In: PLoS Biology, 4 (5): e157, May 2006. Online at: http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=index-html&issn=1545-7885 [Accessed 11 November 2006].

5. Willinsky J. (2003), Scholarly associations and the viability of open access publishing. In: Journal of Digital Information, 4 (2): Article 177, April 2003. Online at: http://jodi.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Articles/v04/i02/Willinsky/ [Accessed 11 November 2006].

6. Prosser DC. (2004), Between a rock and a hard place: the big squeeze for small publishers. In: Learned Publishing, 17 (1): 17-22, 2004. Online at: http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00000945/ [Accessed 11 November 2006].

7. Hunter K. (2004), Open access: yes, no, maybe. Online at: http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/accessdebate/3.html [Accessed 11 November 2006].

8. Suber P. (2006), Nine questions for hybrid journal programs. Online at: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/09-02-06.htm#hybrid [Accessed 11 November 2006].

9. Ibid.

10. Senate of the United States (2006), Federal Research Public Access Act of 2006. Online at: http://cornyn.senate.gov/doc_archive/05-02-2006_COE06461_xml.pdf [Accessed 11 November 2006].

11. ATA-Federal Research Public Access Act of 2006. http://taxpayeraccess.org/frpaa/index.html [Accessed 11 November 2006].

12. European Commission (2006), Study on the economic and technical evolution of the scientific publication markets in Europe. Online at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/page_en.cfm?id=3185 [Accessed 11 November 2006].

13. Harnad S (2006), First Things First: OA Self-Archiving, Then Maybe OA Publishing. Online at: http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/155-First-Things-First-OA-Self-Archiving,-Then-Maybe-OA-Publishing.html [Accessed 11 November 2006].

14. Banks MA (2005), Towards a continuum of scholarship: the eventual collapse of the distinction between grey and non-grey literature. Proceedings GL7: Seventh International Conference on Grey Literature, 2005. Online at: http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00005803/ [Accessed 11 November 2006].

15. Science Commons. http://sciencecommons.org/ [Accessed 11 November 2006.

16. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (2006), Draft Policy on Access to CIHR-funded Research Outputs. Online at: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/32326.html [Accessed 11 November 2006].

17. United States Copyright Office Summary (1998), Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. Online at: http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf [Accessed 11 November 2006].

18. European Parliament (1996), Directive 96/9/EC on the Legal Protection of Databases. Online at: http://europa.eu.int/ISPO/infosoc/legreg/docs/969ec.html [Accessed 11 November 2006].

19. Suber P. (2006), Nine questions for hybrid journal programs. Online at: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/09-02-06.htm#hybrid [Accessed 11 November 2006].

20. Oxford Journals-Life Sciences-Nucleic Acids Research. Online at: http://www.oxfordjournals.org/nar/about.html [Accessed 11 November 2006].

21. Murray-Rust P, Rzepa HS. (2004), The Next Big Thing: From Hypermedia to Datuments. In: Journal of Digital Information, 5 (1): Article 248, March 2004. Online at: http://jodi.tamu.edu/Articles/v05/i01/Murray-Rust/ [Accessed 11 November 2006].

22. Markoff J. (2006), Entrepreneurs See a Web Guided by Common Sense. In: New York Times, A1, November 12, 2006. Online at: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/business/12web.html?hp&ex=1163394000&en=a34a6306f48166fb&ei=5094&partner=homepage [Accessed 12 November 2006].


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item