Category Archives: Issues

Why Universities Need Scholarly Communications Experts

Posted December 20, 2016

Pamela Samuelson, President, Authors Alliance

Note: This article originally appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Education on December 11, 2016, but is available to subscribers only. The full text is reprinted below.

Universities have long felt victimized by proprietary publishers who charge their libraries large sums of money for the journals, books, and other materials in which faculty research is regularly published. Why, university administrators often ask themselves, do we have to pay twice for this work: once when we pay faculty members’ salaries, and then again when we pay for the journals and other publications in which their research appears?

In the last two decades, many administrators have come to realize that advances in communications technologies present opportunities for their institutions and faculty members to achieve their missions of producing and disseminating knowledge more effectively than ever before. Indeed, scholars can now reach and have an impact on readers all over the world, not merely on a small and closed community of fellow academics.

In an effort to take advantage of the opportunities of the digital age and reverse or at least mitigate the more troubling trends in scholarly publishing, some leading research universities, including the University of California at Berkeley and at Davis, Duke and Harvard Universities, and the University of Toronto, have hired scholarly communications experts. While these professionals’ assistance in shaping institutional information policies has been invaluable, even more significant is the role that they can play in achieving bottom-up changes in the culture of scholarly communications.

They can help faculty members, students, and other researchers become more knowledgeable about managing their copyrights and publishing contracts, understanding what they can and can’t do with the work of others, and complying with federal or grant mandates about enabling public access to research and data.

These specialists are especially valuable in creating lines of communication between university librarians, who are responsible for acquiring and managing large collections of scholarly materials that their communities need to access, and the faculty, students, and researchers who both use and produce scholarship. Those users sometimes struggle over copyright, contract, and other policy issues when deciding what they can and should do with scholarly materials produced by others, and when determining how best to disseminate their own work.

If faculty members, in particular, get smarter about copyright and publishing contracts, universities may be able to make faculty research more widely available. Either by negotiations or by university policy, professors may be able to retain sufficient rights to make and authorize nonprofit educational uses of their works. This could enable them to post it on course websites, put it in digital libraries, and grant permission to colleagues to do the same without having to get publisher permissions or pay fees. Such dissemination serves universities’ teaching and research missions, and the interests of scholars who write to have an impact on their students, their fields of study, and the larger society.

Scholarly communications officers and directors are generally located in research library offices, but their responsibilities include answering questions and offering guidance for the entire campus community. Here are just some additional services they can provide:

  • Review publishing contracts and make suggestions about terms for which faculty members should try to negotiate (e.g., a rights reversion clause if the work sells below a certain level per year).
  • Translate contract terms that faculty members don’t understand and explain why publishers might ask for them.
  • Provide advice about open access options and help faculty to decide whether those options might better achieve faculty goals for dissemination of their work.
  • Help authors comply with grant obligations, especially now when government agencies and other funders often require public access to research conducted with their grants.
  • Talk with professors about fair use issues. If a historian, for instance, wants to quote from a subject’s letters or use photographs from the 1950s, a scholarly communications officer can point her to resources about copyright law’s fair use doctrine. This helps faculty to make more informed judgments about whether their desired uses are consistent with copyright norms as well as norms of their fields.
  • Make suggestions about how an author can clear necessary rights if the intended uses go beyond what fair use would reasonably allow.
  • Help authors recapture, through rights reversions, faculty whose books may have been out of print or otherwise commercially inactive for decades. Authors Alliance, of which I am president, has published a guide to rights reversions and templates for letters to send to publishers to regain control of copyrights, but most faculty members don’t know about these resources. Scholarly communications experts do.
  • Advise graduate students about whether to agree to embargos of their dissertations and how to think carefully about the terms of any embargo. Today’s scholarly work that is “born digital” has the potential to reach a global audience immediately, yet graduate students face familiar insecurities about publication and job prospects. The scholarly communications office can help them learn at the very outset of their scholarly careers about how to establish their academic reputations and maximize the impact of their scholarship.

Designation of a scholarly communications officer is not a silver bullet that will reverse the rising costs of scholarly journals or shrinking budgets for monographs and other resources. Nor can it ensure that scholarly communications will reach its full digital age potential. But experts in the field can build valuable connections between the researchers who consume and produce scholarly works and the librarians who are responsible for acquiring these works and making them accessible. And their universities are investing in a better future for scholarly communications.

Authors Alliance Comment to U.S. Copyright Office Supports Print-Disabled Readers

Posted November 9, 2016

As part of our ongoing advocacy in the space, Authors Alliance has again responded to the U.S. Copyright Office’s call for further comments regarding anti-circumvention provisions in Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. We believe in making reasonable exemptions from the law that protects digital “locks” that keep content inaccessible. In the past, we have successfully advocated for for such an exemption supporting the creative work of multimedia ebook authors, and earlier this year, we submitted comments in support of streamlining the law’s rulemaking process.

Our most recent comment is in favor of a permanent exemption that would improve access to copyrighted works by people who are blind, visually impaired, and print disabled. There is broad consensus that such an exemption is beneficial and necessary; in fact, it has been granted in every rulemaking cycle since 2003. We fully support a permanent exemption that would help make our members’ works accessible to these audiences. Read the full text of the comment here.

Rightsback.org Termination of Transfer Tool

Posted October 31, 2016

In October of 2016, we launched a new online tool at rightsback.org, made with our allies at Creative Commons and designed to help authors navigate the “termination of transfer” provisions of U.S. copyright law.

Complementing our efforts around rights reversions, the area of the law our tool helps clarify allows authors (or, in some cases, their family members) to regain rights to creative works signed away many years ago. Though these termination rights are an extremely powerful boon for authors and creators, exercising them can be daunting. The law is complex and difficult to navigate, requiring attention to detail and careful timing.

The tool provides basic information about how the eligibility and timing of a right based on user input, along with suggestions on next steps that a creator may wish to take in securing rights. To learn more, view our demo video, featuring Professor Sidonie Smith of the University of Michigan that goes through the tool step by step.

As always, you can contact us directly with any questions or suggestions. We are excited to share this  resource with you, and look forward to your comments.

Brush Up on Your Open Access Knowledge With Our OA Handbook

Posted October 27, 2016

screen-shot-2016-10-27-at-11-54-50-am

Just in time for Open Access Week, we’re highlighting our guidebook, Understanding Open Access: When, Why, & How To Make Your Work Openly Accessible. This is the second volume in our series of educational handbooks, following on the success of Understanding Rights Reversion. Our goal is to encourage our members to consider open access publishing by addressing common questions and concerns and by providing real-life strategies and tools that authors can use to work with publishers, institutions, and funders to make their works more widely accessible to all. Here’s a short excerpt from Chapter 1 to get you started.


Are you considering making your work openly accessible?

Are you required to make your work openly accessible by an institutional or funding mandate?

If you answered “yes” to either of these questions—or just want to learn more about open access—then read on! Understanding Open Access is for authors of all backgrounds, fields, and disciplines, from the sciences to the humanities. Because the open access ecosystem in academia is particularly complex, this guide is largely geared to the needs of authors working for academic institutions or under funding mandates. However, many chapters are suitable for authors who write other in contexts, and we encourage all authors interested in open access to read those sections relevant to their needs.

This guide will help you determine whether open access is right for you and your work and, if so, how to make your work openly accessible. This primer on open access explains what “open access” means, addresses common concerns and misconceptions you may have about open access, and provides you with practical steps to take if you wish to make your work openly accessible.

For example, this guide will help you:

  • Learn more about open access and related options;
  • Comply with an open access policy from an employer or funding agency;
  • Select the terms on which you would like to make a work openly accessible;
  • Publish a work with an open access publisher;
  • Make a work openly accessible on a personal or group website;
  • Deposit a work in an open access repository;
  • Negotiate with a conventional publisher to make a work openly accessible;
  • And much more.

This guide is the product of extensive interviews with authors, publishers, and institutional representatives who shared their perspectives on open access options in today’s publishing environment. The information, strategies, and examples included in this guide share the collective wisdom of our interviewees, members, and other experts.


If you have questions or comments about open access, or wish to share your own experiences with open access publishing, get in touch and let us know!

Authors Alliance Partners With the Internet Archive to Make Books Available

Posted October 26, 2016

IA-AA logos

Since the release of our guide to Understanding Rights Reversion in 2015, we have featured a number of “Rights Reversion Success Stories”—books that have been given a new life thanks to their authors’ efforts to regain publication rights and share their work widely.  Many of our members’ titles are already discoverable through the HathiTrust digital library, and we are now partnering with San Francisco-based Internet Archive to make public domain and Creative Commons-licensed works available in full on our new Authors Alliance Collection.

If you’re interested in making your own works more available, see our Resources page for information about rights reversion and open access. We also encourage you try out the beta of our brand-new Termination of Transfers engine—a step-by-step tool developed in partnership with Creative Commons that can help with regaining rights. Internet Archive has also created a handy DIY Guide to Sharing Your Book, with a list of handy links.

And if you have already regained rights to your previously published book(s) and would like to feature them in the Internet Archive, contact us! We can help our members sort out the details, including the scanning and ingest of pre-digital works.

We’re thrilled to be partnering with the Internet Archive on this initiative. Contact us to get started, and help us build the Authors Alliance collection page in the Internet Archive!

This Open Access Week, learn about regaining rights with our new tool

Posted October 25, 2016

openaccess

Just in time for Open Access Week, we are pleased to announce the launch of a brand-new online tool made with our allies at Creative Commons and designed to help authors navigate the “termination of transfer” provisions of U.S. copyright law. The theme of this year’s Open Access Week is “Open in Action” and our new tool helps creators take actionable steps to regain rights and make their work more accessible.

Complementing our efforts around rights reversions, the area of the law our tool helps clarify allows authors (or, in some cases, their family members) to regain rights to creative works signed away many years ago. Though these termination rights are an extremely powerful boon for authors and creators, exercising them can be daunting. The law is complex and difficult to navigate, requiring attention to detail and careful timing.

That is why we’ve partnered with Creative Commons to build an online tool to help clarify the law’s terms and make its intricate timing requirements easier to follow. Through a series of prompts, users enter information about a work, and the tool provides basic information about how the eligibility and timing of a right, along with suggestions on next steps that a creator may wish to take in securing rights.

Want to see it in action? Check out the demo video we’ve made, featuring Professor Sidonie Smith of the University of Michigan (and a member of our advisory board) that goes through the tool step by step.

Want to try it out? The new Termination of Transfer tool is currently in beta, and still needs your review and feedback. We encourage authors and creators to give it a try, and hope you’ll share your feedback via the public comments page. And, as always, you can contact us directly with any questions or suggestions. We are excited to share this new resource with you, and look forward to your comments.

Is it time for authors to leave SSRN?

Posted July 17, 2016

Since we first heard of mega-publisher Elsevier’s acquisition of SSRN, the popular social sciences pre-print and working paper repository, we have expressed concern. Elsevier is not known to be an avid supporter of the open access publishing practices favored by many of our members, and has historically taken a restrictive stance toward author control and ownership of scholarship.

In response, we reached out to Elsevier and to SSRN with a set of principles the service could adopt that would reassure authors that SSRN could continue to be a go-to resource for those looking to refine and share their work. We have since heard back from SSRN: they would not commit to adopting even one of our principles. They offered more general reassurances that their policies would continue as before. We were not satisfied, but we decided to wait and see whether our fears would be borne out.

As feared, it now appears that SSRN is taking up restrictive and hostile positions against authors’ ability to decide when and how to share their work. Reports are surfacing that, without notice, SSRN is removing author-posted documents following SSRN’s own, opaque determination that the author must have transferred copyright, the publisher had not consented to the posting, or where the author has opted to use a non-commercial Creative Commons license. One author, Andrew Selbst, reported that SSRN refused his post even though the article’s credits reflected his retained copyright.

This policy fails to honor the rights individual authors have negotiated in order to put their work on services like SSRN. It misreads the Creative Commons licenses authors adopt in order to share their work. And it is a marked departure from the standard notice and takedown procedures typically used to remove user-uploaded copyright-infringing works from the web, eliminating both any apparent notice from the putative copyright owner and any clear recourse for the affected authors.

SSRN authors: you have not committed to SSRN. You can remove your papers from their service, and you can opt instead to make your work available in venues that show real commitment to the sharing, vetting, and refinement of academic work.

Just recently, SocArXiv—a new social sciences preprint archive built on the model pioneered in physics by arXiv—opened their doors to submissions. SocArXiv is supported by the University of Maryland, not run for profit, and formed with an explicit commitment to openness in academic writing. They are still in early days, but appear to be building a promising successor community to SSRN.

It is also important to remember that your work does not need to be restricted to any one venue. Try SocArXiv, but also see if you can host your work in an institutional repository or on a personal website. Make your work available wherever it can best reach your readers. It is also worth protesting the practices that would restrict your work’s availability and reach by leaving the services adopting them. If the reports about SSRN’s new practices are accurate, then it may be time to leave SSRN and adopt more author-friendly alternatives. Authors, tell us about your experiences with SSRN and other repositories by sending a note to info@authorsalliance.org.

Authors Alliance Presents Elsevier With Principles for Openness in SSRN

Posted June 2, 2016

The recent purchase of the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) by Elsevier has caused a great deal of concern among our members and in the scholarly community. In response, Authors Alliance has created a list of principles that could be adoped by Elsevier to reassure authors that SSRN will remain open and author-friendly. Today, we presented those principles to the leadership of both SSRN and Elsevier for consideration. We will continue to scrutinize the transition in ownership and any changes in SSRN’s policies, and look forward to engaging in a constructive conversation in response to our concerns.

After Reversion: Tracking Down Digital Copies

Posted May 20, 2016

After you get your rights back with Understanding Rights Reversion, how will you make your work newly available? The internet offers no shortage of ways to disseminate your work, but it’s still not necessarily easy to see your work successfully placed in all the channels you would like. Authors Alliance is committed to helping its members take full advantage of the digital age’s promise for their recovered works, and this online guide is part of a series designed to help them with that goal.

Last updated: 2016-10-13

So you have your rights back, and have big dreams about what you’ll do next. Release your work as an open access title—something that was perhaps unimaginable when it was originally published? Maybe convert it into an “enhanced” electronic version? Update it for release as a new edition?

Before doing any of these, you will need a digital version of the text. Do you have one? If not, don’t panic: there’s more than one way to get your work back out there.

Step 1: Can your publisher provide a copy?

As we stress in Understanding Rights Reversion, recovering rights to an out-of-print or otherwise unavailable title does not have to be an adversarial or acrimonious process. While your publisher is not likely under an obligation to furnish you with any digital copies in their possession, they might nevertheless do so out of goodwill.

Contract Drafting Tip: you can include a commitment from the publisher to furnish you with digital copies of your work in the case of a reversion. Consider doing so!

Your own word processing files, or those recovered from your publisher, will be the easiest and best way to make your reverted work available because modern files can be painlessly converted to the most popular e-reading formats. But there’s still hope even if you don’t have that advantage.

Step 2: Find and “unlock” other existing digital versions

Authors Alliance has written many times before about how mass digitization efforts benefit authors by making their work more discoverable. But there’s an additional advantage for authors looking for digital copies of their work: a scanned copy of the document might already exist as the result of a mass digitization effort. Authors with the necessary rights can often work with these projects to see their works “unlocked” and made newly available.

Have documentation regarding your rights reversion on hand to demonstrate your ownership of the necessary rights, and then consider tracking down copies from some of these existing collections:

HathiTrust is a digital library partnership of dozens of academic libraries, containing millions of titles indexed for full-text search. While in-copyright titles are not viewable, individual rights holders can change the availability of their works by filling out a simple permissions form, available here.

In addition to opting to make your work available, the HathiTrust permissions form also helps authors to apply a Creative Commons license to their work. For more information on why you might want to use a Creative Commons license, and the ins and outs of the various choices, take a look at Chapter 4 of our guide, Understanding Open Access.

The HathiTrust process is a simple way to both make your work available, and to gain access to a pre-existing digital copy. Authors Alliance members Robert Darnton, John Kingdon, Joseph Nye, Stephen Sugarman, and others have taken this route.

Google Books is the world’s largest book scanning effort, currently containing tens of millions of volumes. As with HathiTrust, Google does not make in-copyright books available to the public, but instead allows their text to be searched. And, as with HathiTrust, authors who have reverted rights can make their work available through the Google Books service. However, Google’s process is a little more difficult.

First, you’ll need to be a “partner” at the Google Books Partner Center, essentially, signing up as a publisher on the Google platform. Please note that, as of the time of writing, Google is not allowing new sign ups for this platform. However, some of our members have nevertheless been able to secure accounts after talking with Google support.

Once set up with an account, support should be able to link your partner account with your work, and make it available on the terms you request.

Finally, The Internet Archive, the internet’s own non-profit library, is another source that might have a scanned copy of your book. There is not yet a formal process for unlocking books on the Internet Archive, but stay tuned—we’ll be updating this post with more information as we work with them to make the process easy for authors. In the meantime, try reaching out directly to the Archive at info@archive.org with a link to the page containing your work and let them know that you’ve recovered rights and would like to see it unlocked.

Step 3: Scan and OCR your book

If you cannot find an existing digital copy, you can still make one. There are any number of book scanning services out there (a quick web search will turn up many), and the Internet Archive can also both non-destructively scan and host your books.

You may also request that Google scan your book at one of its Library Partners.  According to HathiTrust, you may use this form to make the request. If the book is scanned at a Library Partner that participates in HathiTrust, it will also end up in HathiTrust, at which point you will need to complete the HathiTrust permissions agreement.

When scanning, there are a few things to consider. Some book scanning processes are destructive, resulting in the loss of the book. Not something to do with a rare copy!

You will also want to consider quality. Scanning is simply photographing pages. Those pages can (and should) undergo “optical character recognition” or “OCR,” where the computer works to identify and read text on the page. Better quality scanning helps with quality OCR, which will help give you a more usable, discoverable, and readable document.

Have further questions? Stick around! Further posts in this series will explore where and how works can be posted in order to maximize their discoverability and usability. You can also always email us at reversions@authorsalliance.org, or join us as a member to get our latest updates.

Principles For Reassuring Authors of SSRN-Posted Papers Under Elsevier’s Ownership

Posted May 19, 2016

Note: This post was updated on June 2, 2016 in order to reflect changes in the final list of principles as presented to Elsevier and SSRN.

For-profit publisher Elsevier’s acquisition of the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) was disturbing news for many scholars who use SSRN to share their writings with colleagues. SSRN was never fully committed to the broadest conceptions of open access. But for those of us who have posted our works on SSRN over the years, it was open enough for purposes of disseminating our works to readers without charge. Our user-generated content—the hundreds of thousands of scholarly works that researchers have posted on SSRN and the network effects that have arisen from our usage of the site—is what made the SSRN platform valuable to scholars and readers, as well as valuable enough for Elsevier to want to acquire it. That content is collectively ours, not SSRN’s, and not Elsevier’s.

Despite some reassurances that SSRN policies won’t change post-acquisition, there is reason to be concerned about the willingness of an Elsevier-run SSRN to accommodate the open access preferences of scholars who post there. Elsevier has recognized that displaying some receptiveness to open access is shrewd in the current era, although it has pursued policies that have created obstacles to true open access in the view of many scholars.

How might Elsevier reassure SSRN authors that it will continue to respect the policies that have attracted scholarly authors to post on that site? As a starting point, Authors Alliance proposes these principles:

  1.  SSRN will be transparent about Elsevier’s plans for SSRN and apprise all contributing authors of any contemplated change no less than four months before effectuating it.
  2.  To post a work on SSRN, authors will not need to grant SSRN more than a nonexclusive license to reproduce and distribute verbatim copies of that work in the SSRN database. Licenses for any additional uses of authors’ works must be obtained separately.
  3.  The license for posting is and will remain a revocable license, so that if authors decide to withdraw their work from SSRN because of changes in its policies, or for any other reason, they can take down their previously posted works and can download a copy of their works before taking them down.
  4.  SSRN will remain an open platform for posting works regardless of their publication status. SSRN will not adopt a policy prohibiting authors from posting their works to SSRN where that posting is not prohibited by any agreement that the author has made with another party or any other obligation undertaken by the author.
  5.  SSRN will not remove a work posted by an author unless the author directs that it should be taken down, or SSRN must take the work down to comply with applicable law.
  6.  Authors may freely update versions of previously posted works.
  7.  SSRN will not interfere with authors’ ability to self-archive works posted on SSRN and to post the same works on other sites, including institutional open access repositories.
  8.  SSRN users should be able to download works posted on SSRN for any lawful purpose, without charge, unless the author elects to impose a charge. Such an agreement should be specifically obtained and separately consented to.
  9.  Authors’ right to rely on fair use to post works on SSRN that include third-party materials will not be limited by the terms of any SSRN or Elsevier policy or license.
  10. SSRN will not give preferential treatment in posting, search results, rankings, or otherwise to works published by Elsevier, to authors affiliated with Elsevier or Elsevier-related entities, services, or tools, nor to publications distributed for a fee.
  11. SSRN will promptly notify in advance authors who have posted works on SSRN about any changes in SSRN policies or terms of service that would impact the interests of those authors, including attempted changes in the terms of the license granted by authors or changes in the availability of posted works and statistics about views and downloads of posted articles. Changes in license terms or availability of works or data shall not take effect without affirmative consent from affected authors, not merely on the basis of blanket consent to prior policies.

This list focuses primarily on terms of use related to ownership and licensing of the articles posted on SSRN. It does not exhaust the features that will be important to keeping SSRN an attractive platform for the scholarly community. We also care about the platform’s approach to privacy, metadata, usage statistics, and interoperability. As the contributors of content that underlies SSRN’s value, we will monitor with interest whether these policies align with our values.


Agree with these principles? Join us in standing up for them by joining us as a member, or by letting SSRN know on twitter.