“Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), a not-for-profit organization and leading provider of licensing and Open Access (OA) solutions, has joined the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), which offers a forum for bringing together the entire Open Access community. “As traditional and new publishers gather and create standards around Open Access publishing, it’s increasingly important to have organizations like OASPA leading dialogue among publishers, academics, researchers and others,” said Roy Kaufman, Managing Director, New Ventures, CCC. “We’re honored to be a part of OASPA’s ambitious mission of exchanging information, setting standards, improving the author experience, educating the research community and the public and promoting innovation.” (via Copyright Clearance Center)
“From the tragic death of (Internet activist and digital wunderkind) Aaron Swartz to a recent CU-Boulder faculty resolution, new federal funding agency policy directives from the White House, and extensive international media coverage, the movement to provide open access to research and scholarship continues to build momentum and evolve at a rapid pace.
“Four years after the MIT faculty adopted their Open Access Policy, a significant new milestone has been reached: Papers made openly available through the Open Access Articles Collection have been downloaded over 1 million times. Total downloads from the collection of just under 9,000 papers reached 1,045,518 by the end of April.” (via MIT Libraries)
“A bill in the California legislature would require state-funded research to be made public free of charge within a year of its publication. If it passes, the bill would create an open access policy for California’s state-funded research similar to a policy announced earlier this year by the Obama administration. The federal policy, which is not yet finalized, would apply to most federally supported non-defense research. California is not the only state moving to make public the published research it helps to fund; Illinois is weighing a similar proposal.” (via Inside Higher Ed)
“The Association of American Universities (AAU), Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU), and Association of Research Libraries (ARL) have released a two-page statement by David E. Shulenburger calling on the research university community to provide input to the US Government for increasing access to the results of federally-funded research.” (via Research Information)
“In response to the seismic shift in the publishing landscape brought on by open access (OA), Taylor & Francis has asked its author community for its views and behaviour related to the subject. The company received 14,769 responses, with the feedback helping publishers to understand authors’ needs and inform the development of its policies, both in terms of OA, and more widely. (via Research Information)
“When MIT faculty adopted an open access (OA) policy for their scholarly articles in March 2009, they expressed a strong philosophical commitment to disseminating “the fruits of their research and scholarship” as widely as possible. The MIT Libraries are paying close attention to recent events in Washington that have the potential to expand this commitment to include a significant percentage of all federally funded research in the United States. On February 22, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) issued a directive asking each federal agency with over $100 million in annual research and development expenditures to develop a plan to support increased public access to the results of research they fund. Agencies have six months to come up with policies that would make both articles and data openly available to the public, consistent with a set of objectives set out in the memorandum. The OSTP has been evaluating the need for more open access to federally funded research for several years; in 2010 and 2012 it collected public comments, including those from MIT.” (via MIT Libraries News)
“Jeffrey Beall, a research librarian at the University of Colorado in Denver, has developed his own blacklist of what he calls “predatory open-access journals.” There were 20 publishers on his list in 2010, and now there are more than 300. He estimates that there are as many as 4,000 predatory journals today, at least 25 percent of the total number of open-access journals. “It’s almost like the word is out,” he said. “This is easy money, very little work, a low barrier start-up.” Journals on what has become known as “Beall’s list” generally do not post the fees they charge on their Web sites and may not even inform authors of them until after an article is submitted. They barrage academics with e-mail invitations to submit articles and to be on editorial boards.” (via NYTimes.com)
“The editor and the entire editorial board of the Journal of Library Administration have resigned in response to a conflict with the journal’s publisher over an author agreement that they say is “too restrictive and out of step with the expectations of authors.” The licensing terms set by the publisher, Taylor & Francis Group, were scaring away potential authors, the editor who resigned, Damon Jaggars, told The Chronicle.” (via The Chronicle of Higher Education)
“NIU Libraries has launched a pilot Open Access Fund that will provide small grants to faculty and graduate students to help defray the upfront costs associated with open access publishing. Grappling with the costs for expensive journal subscriptions, a number of universities nationwide, including Harvard and MIT, are promoting open access publishing. It provides unrestricted online access to peer-reviewed journal articles, thus broadening access to scholarly research.
The NIU Open Access Fund seeks to advance the use of open access as a means of distributing the research and creative work of the Northern Illinois University community.”