DEAL & Beall: Open Access contributions in Archivalia 2017
Published on 29 October 2017 by Klaus Graf

https://archivalia.hypotheses.org/68174

This is an DeepL-translation in English!

Up to now I have written 165 articles in the category Open Access in 2017. I would like to highlight some of the important entries and focal points of the report.

*

A permanent topic was the conduct of the biggest scientific publisher Elsevil ("Elsevil") and the DEAL negotiations of the German organisations. The acquisition of bepress by Elsevier, announced in August, was widely noted.

*

Predatory Publishers ": In January, we read: Open Access foe Jeffrey #Beall has taken his controversial list of dubious Open Access journals off the net without explanation. Beall was forced by massive pressure from his employer to abandon his list of predatory publishers, one learned in June.

*

The illegal shadow library Sci-Hub was frequently discussed. A separate list of articles (2017 to date: 9) is available.

*

Green Open Access: A hot topic was the ground-breaking preprint servers. Publishers' action against the commercial academic network ResearchGate shows once again that green OA is one of publisher's graces.

On June 6,2017, I list the disadvantages of green OA:

On the occasion of the debate on the Open Access Practical Manual, I have again listed the most important points that I consider to be important:

Why are there reservations about green OA?

See already https://archivalia.hypotheses.org/7550 (2013)

1. he has a format problem

Humanities scholars like me like to quote after the WOR; in most cases this is not possible because the publishers are blocking publishing houses.

2. he has an embargo problem

It has been repeatedly shown that 1 year embargo is too long for a practice manual.

Third, he has a legal problem.

Green OA is OA by Publisher's Grace.

Instead of making massive calls for the use of § 38 I, OA actors such as the new FID Romanistik are taking part in the publishing houses' FUD:

https://archivalia.hypotheses.org/65285

4. he has a licensing problem

Usually, only free OA goes green, not libre OA. Here too, the reason: Publisher blockade.

https://archivalia.hypotheses.org/62601

5. he has a comfort and awareness problem

IRs dismember the research achievements of the scientists (when changing institutions); convincing disciplinary repositories do not exist nationwide; many scientists choose Academia. edu etc. instead of OA repositories (because known alternatives to IRs have horse feet and less well known but recommendable ones are hardly known) and because uploading there is found to be more convenient.

Nevertheless, I myself use open access repositories for my own green publications. In January 2017 I was able to announce: All my books Open Access on the net.

*

Open Access Monographs: These do not play a role in manuscript research: New publications on German-speaking manuscripts in 2016 - virtually nothing like Open Access. With the retro-digitisation of monographs, the University of Löwen has chosen an unreliable partner in Google Books: WTF - Google changes Book-ID, Löwener Universitätsverlag has built its Open Access on sand. An IFG inquiry in Schleswig-Holstein revealed: The German National Library of Economics and Business Studies has paid Duncker & Humblot no less than 16,362 Euro for the rights and retro-digitisation of the 57 volumes (11360 pages) of the RWI publication series 1968-2009!

*

Public Domain: France: Archives Nationales allow for free re-use of archival material - a very good news on 10 August 2017.2017 the #Gemeinfreitag in Archivalia (crowdsourcing for the public domain) was able to make more media available on the net in 2017 than 2016, for every day in 2017 there are already two media.

*

It is important to me to report about search tools for OA. I informed about DOI search services in January, in March I introduced the browser extension Unpaywall.

CORE has a lot less documents than BASE, but it offers a full text search via PDFs. Such full-text searches are extremely important in my eyes. In my presentation on Google Books in Constance I wrote:

Non-commercial and commercial full-text search providers should be encouraged to cooperate more closely in academic meta searches.

So that would be my vision: Let thousands of networked, i. e. easily searchable full-text searches flourish next to Google! Especially those who avoid Google's mistakes and copy its advantages....

Legal questions:"" The decision on the statutes of 10 December 2015, which obliges the scientists of the University of Constance to exercise their so-called "right to secondary publication", will be served in writing. The court's statement of the case draws a model to the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe "(26 September 2017). VG Wort and Open Access: Scientists will continue to be able to place their contributions under a free license, they said.

*

Two reading recommendations:"Open Access between revolution and the golden donkey. Fifteen years after the Budapest Open Access Initiative's declaration "- a very sceptical summary by Ulrich Herb. Kathrin Passig asked:"When museums and cultural institutions share their collections, others can use them more easily. What users do with it is not always what showcase projects and remix competitions put into the foreground. The benefits of free works are often unspectacular - but not less valuable."

*

Those who advocate Open Access should also take note of the linguistic barriers of science and scholarship, was thesis iv in my contribution: Theses on linguistic education in science, academia and archives.
Shared publiclyView activity