Profile

Cover photo
Peter Suber
Works at Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication
4,881 followers|1,431,331 views
AboutPostsPhotos+1's
Story
Introduction
I work for the free circulation of science and scholarship in every field and language. In practice that means research, writing, organizing, and pro bono consulting for open access to research. I wear several hats:
I'm the founder of the Open Access Tracking Project, co-founder of the Open Access Directory, and co-developer of TagTeam.

My latest book is Open Access (MIT Press, 2012). The book itself is OA, and I've created a book home page for posting updates and supplements, and linking to reviews, translations, and OA editions. Also see my other writings on open access, my writings on topics other than open access, and my section of the Harvard institutional repository.

For more detail, see my home page.

My G+ posts are automatically reposted to my Twitter account. I seldom post to Twitter manually. I don't use FB or LinkedIn at all. For now, I'm on what Mike Elgan calls a Google+ diet

Most of my G+ posts are about open access (OA), but most of what I want to share about OA doesn't yet make it to G+. I tag new OA developments for the Open Access Tracking Project (OATP). You can follow complete versions of the OATP feed on the web or by RSS, Atom, JSONP, or email. There are also Twitter and G+ versions of the feed, but unfortunately they are both abridged (details here and here respectively). 
Basic Information
Gender
Male

Stream

Peter Suber

Shared publicly  - 
 
Reddit AMA with Andy Beck on open access and the future of cancer treatment. 

h/t +David Weinberger 

#oa #openaccess #cancer
1
Add a comment...

Peter Suber

Shared publicly  - 
 
Better than pizza.

The Graduate and Professional Student Senate at +Iowa State University voted to use its budget surplus to create a grad-student scholarly communications center and stock it with books. The surplus is only $1,924.97, but we all know places where it could have disappeared in pizza. Kudos to the GPSS.
5
Max Tiol Gonzalez's profile photo
 
Great!
Add a comment...
 
Publishers arguing badly for longer embargoes, again.

The Association of American Publishers (AAP) is arguing that an AAP-funded study supports the AAP position that federal open-access policies should allow longer embargoes. 
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/education/239435-scientific-publishing-policy-should-be-based-on-facts-not

The AAP argument is deceptive. Among other things, it doesn't mention that the study on which it relies was AAP-funded. While I have no quarrel with the study itself, the argument from the study to the AAP's pet conclusion is utterly invalid. See my analysis at the time the study appeared, anticipating the current AAP position, "What doesn't justify longer embargoes on publicly-funded research."
https://plus.google.com/+PeterSuber/posts/gPRFVdDD8Dg

#oa #openaccess #fastr #embargoes 
10
3
Richard Poynder's profile photoTomasz Lewandowski's profile photo
Add a comment...
 
RFP for orphan-works project.

Request for Proposal (RFP): Writing a literature review on strategies for digitizing orphan works for open access

Release date of this RFP:  April 16, 2015
Due date for responses:  May 30, 2015
Start date for the work: July 1, 2015
End date for the work: January 31, 2016 

Issued by: Harvard Library Office for Scholarly Communication 

The project will be supervised by Peter Suber, Director of the Office for Scholarly Communication. 

Proposal requested

The Office for Scholarly Communication seeks bids or tenders from scholars interested in writing a comprehensive literature review on the question whether there are lawful or low-risk strategies to digitize orphan works for open access under US copyright law, with special attention to methods that do not depend on fair use.

The author must have a JD degree or equivalent, proven skills in legal research and writing, and special strengths in US copyright law and legal issues raised by orphan works, open access, and mass digitization. 

By “open access” (OA) for this purpose we mean global, digital, online access that is free charge, with or without open licenses permitting forms of reuse beyond the limits of fair use.

The literature review will identify legal arguments and strategies for reducing or eliminating legal risk from projects to digitize orphan works for OA under US law. It will identify arguments that have been used in court, strategies that have been used in practice, and arguments and strategies proposed in the literature, giving special attention to those that do not depend on fair use. (The project does not assume that fair-use arguments are unpromising, merely that they have already been well-studied.) It will review relevant statutes, regulations, case law, and legal literature to evaluate the adequacy of those arguments and strategies. The study should also look at legal strategies adopted in other countries insofar as they suggest strategies that might work in the US. It should identify institutions inside and outside the US that have already digitized orphan works for OA, what strategies they used, and what legal consequences they faced for doing so. Whether or not the study uncovers no-risk methods to digitize orphan works for OA, it should identify methods to reduce legal risk. It should conclude with recommendations on methods or strategies, if any, that would be no-risk or low-risk under US law. 

The question for the literature review is not what amendments to the copyright statute would best solve the orphan-works problem. Nor is it how far or how well fair use could solve this problem. The literature review should understand the fair-use case law and analyses, but look in particular for other types of tried or proposed solutions. In addition to looking for strategies to reduce the risk of litigation or damages, it should look for arguments for judge-made exceptions to the statute, based on the equities and special circumstances of orphan works, or based on analogies to other branches of law raising like questions.

We also encourage the author to identify promising arguments or strategies that have not already been tried or proposed. 

When the literature review reaches this stage, the project will ask a panel of experts to evaluate it and recommend any revisions. When the author has satisfactorily responded to the comments from the panel, the project will make the final revised version public, with full attribution to the author and the names of the members of the panel.

The literature review must be submitted to the panel for evaluation by January 31, 2016. 

Submitting a proposal

We envisage that the literature review will take about seven person-months. Candidates should take this into account when developing their proposals. 

Candidates should describe their qualifications to do the work and the amount they request to do it in the time allowed (July 1, 2015 - January 31, 2016). We encourage candidates who have published related work to cite and link to it in their submissions.

Please submit the bid or tender, or any inquiries, by email to Arlene Navarro at <arlene_navarro@harvard.edu>. 

The submission deadline is May 30, 2015. 

#digitization   #orphans   #orphanworks   #copyright  
1
Add a comment...

Peter Suber

Shared publicly  - 
 
RFP for journal-flipping project. 

Request for Proposal (RFP): Writing a literature review on methods for converting subscription-based scholarly journals to open access

Release date for this RFP:  April 16, 2015
Due date for responses:  May 30, 2015
Start date for the work: July 1, 2015
End date for the work: January 31, 2016 

Issued by: Harvard Library Office for Scholarly Communication (OSC)

The project will be supervised by Peter Suber, Director of the Office for Scholarly Communication. 

Proposal requested

The Harvard OSC requests bids or tenders from scholars interested in writing a comprehensive literature review on methods for converting subscription-based scholarly journals to open access. 

By “open access” (OA) for this purpose we mean global, immediate, digital, online access which is free charge and which makes the content free for reuse under open licenses, preferably CC-BY. By an “OA journal” for this purpose, we mean one that makes all its research articles OA, not just some of them, as with hybrid journals.

The literature review will focus on how journals have converted or might convert to OA, not on why. It will focus on converting non-OA journals, not launching new OA journals. As far as possible, it should identify evidence on the consequences of conversion, e.g. for submissions, readership, quality, impact, and finances. It should identify pathways already taken by converted journals and pathways proposed but not yet tried. It should formulate these pathways as recommendations (steps, plans, instructions) for journals, or journals of a certain kind, to consider. Whenever possible, each recommendation should cite and link to relevant evidence.

If the literature review at this stage is of sufficient quality, the project will make it public and solicit public comments. The purpose of the public comments is to supplement the literature review, make it more complete, more detailed, and more useful. For example, the public comments might add readings omitted from the literature review, extract new recommendations from readings already covered, suggest new clarity or detail for recommendations already formulated, and add notes to help readers consider the merits of the recommendations. The project will then solicit comments from an invited panel of experts on the recommendations in the report, as enlarged or annotated by public comments. The panelists will endorse any recommendations they find worth endorsing, and specify the scholarly niches for which they endorse or recommend them. 

We hope to make the final version public, as enlarged with with the panelists’ endorsements and selected public comments. It will include full attribution to the author of the literature review and the authors of the comments and endorsements.

The literature review should be submitted in digital form and ready for public comments by January 31, 2016. 

Submitting a proposal

We envisage that the literature review will take about seven person-months. Candidates should take this into account when developing their proposals. 

Candidates should describe their qualifications to do the work and the amount they request to do it in the time allowed (July 1, 2015 - January 31, 2016). We encourage candidates who have published related work to cite and link to it in their submissions.

Please submit the bid or tender, or any inquiries, by email to Arlene Navarro at <arlene_navarro@harvard.edu>. 

The submission deadline is May 30, 2015. 

#oa #openaccess 
5
Add a comment...

Peter Suber

Shared publicly  - 
 
Plum job for the right person.

"UC Berkeley Library is looking for a...Scholarly Communication Officer whose principal role will be to educate the university community about scholarly publication modes, intellectual property/copyright, and open access issues and services. S/he will be a campus resource on local, national and international scholarly communication developments and activities and their impact on scholarly inquiry and instruction...."

#oa #openaccess 
University of California, Berkeley Online Faculty Recruitment
7
1
Brian Glanz's profile photo
Add a comment...

Peter Suber

Shared publicly  - 
 
Proud of this. Thanks to all the Harvard authors who deposit their articles in DASH.

#oa, #openaccess
5
James Salsman's profile photo
 
Someday I hope the colleges and universities will unite to make open access publishing free for anyone taking the time and effort to hire someone who knows to encode trade secrets in LaTeX equations.
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
4,881 people
sunil kumar Bisht's profile photo
Baloydi Lloydi's profile photo
Tzafrir Rehan's profile photo
Thomas Gokey's profile photo
Pranto howlader's profile photo
Abdul Qudus's profile photo
Jewel Crux's profile photo
PETER SIMPSON's profile photo
Prime Jyothi's profile photo

Peter Suber

Shared publicly  - 
 
A few minutes ago in Brooksville, Maine. Foggy sunrise on the Bagaduce River.
7
Add a comment...
 
50 universities with open-access policies adopted by unanimous faculty votes.

Kudos to the University of Delaware for the OA policy it adopted on April 6. Among other things, this makes 50 institutions that have adopted OA policies by unanimous faculty votes. 
http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Unanimous_faculty_votes

#oa #openaccess #unanimity  
This list is part of the Open Access Directory. This is a list of unanimous faculty votes for university OA policies. It started as an article in SOAN for June 2010. When possible, annotate each entry with the name of the institution, the date of the vote, a link to the policy, ...
16
5
Mark Bridge's profile photoJosé Carlos Morillo Moreno's profile photo
Add a comment...
 
My next two posts will be RFPs, one for research on converting subscription journals to OA, and the other for research on digitizing orphan works for OA. Please spread the word to anyone who might be interested. Thanks.

#oa #openaccess #orphans , #digitization   #rfp  
2
Add a comment...

Peter Suber

Shared publicly  - 
 
This was my decision and I'm sorry about it. I really wanted the Open Access Tracking Project (+OATP) to have a reliable presence in Google+. Please let me know if you can recommend another RSS-to-G+ service.

#oa #openaccess #oatp
 
With regret, we're temporarily disabling the Google+ version of the OATP feed.

We've been using +Hootsuite to convert the OATP primary RSS feed to G+ posts. But Hootsuite is simply unreliable for this purpose. It stops forwarding feed items to G+ every couple of days, and does not notify us when it stops forwarding.

The full OATP feed publishes 10-30 items every day. Hootsuite's flakiness means that G+ subscribers only see a small fraction of these items, and this makes us look bad.

We'll resume the G+ feed as soon as we find a better RSS-to-G+ tool, and we welcome your suggestions. 

Meantime, the OATP feed is still available in seven other formats: HTML, RSS, Atom, JSON, Email, Twitter, and Pushbullet. All but the Twitter feed are unabridged.
http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/OATP_links

#oatp
View original post
2
John Davidson's profile photo
 
/sub
Add a comment...
 
"+Michael Stonebraker​, an MIT professor who did foundational research in database management systems, an industry that is now worth billions, was announced as the winner of the Alan M. Turing award in computer science on Wednesday....He has open-sourced all of his research...."

#turing_award, #floss

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/03/25/mit-data-storage-researcher-wins-alan-turing-award-million-from-google/ip3CUTdFjExAS2JQVzeLTP/story.html
27
5
Nitin Dhiman's profile photoChiang Lin Ng's profile photoEduardo Ariente's profile photoNicolas Pettiaux's profile photo
 
Tous les scientifiques devraient faire ce que Michael Stonebraker, professeur au #MIT, lauréat du #prixTuring a fait : rendre toutes ses publications accessibles en #openaccess  
 ·  Translate
Add a comment...
Peter Suber's +1's are the things they like, agree with, or want to recommend.
PLOS Science Wednesday: I'm Dr. Andy Beck, open access is the future of ...
www.reddit.com

Hi Reddit! My name is Dr. Andy Beck, and I am an assistant professor in the Department of Pathology at Harvard Medical School, and...

T.H. Tsien, 105, Dies; Scholar of Chinese Books Rescued 30,000 of Them
www.nytimes.com

Professor Tsien risked his life in 1941 to smuggle tens of thousands of rare volumes to safety at the Library of Congress amid the Japanese

Recruitment Details - UC Berkeley AP Recruit
aprecruit.berkeley.edu

University of California, Berkeley Online Faculty Recruitment

New Harvard research debunks the NRA's favorite talking points
www.motherjones.com

Surveys drawing on scores of experts reveal a clear consensus against the gun lobby.

MIT data storage researcher wins Alan Turing award, $1 million from Goog...
www.bostonglobe.com

The Turing award is considered the Nobel in the field of computer science

United States Congress
www.guidrynews.com

Bipartisan Coalition Introduces FASTR Act To Improve Access To Federally-Funded Research. WASHINGTON – A bipartisan coalition of members of

NOT-OD-15-067: Request for Information (RFI) soliciting input into the d...
grants.nih.gov

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: Request for Information (RFI) soliciting input into the del

Joho the Blog » The joy of the public domain
www.hyperorg.com

When Doc Searls and I published our New Clues, we put it into the public domain. Even two months later, it feels good. In fact, seeing it re

Fair Use: The Foundation Of Jon Stewart's Success | Techdirt
www.techdirt.com

Jon Stewart's announcement on February 10 that he will be retiring from The Daily Show later this year has been met with tributes to his com

How the Internet Can Build Just and Open Societies
www.opensocietyfoundations.org

The Open Society Foundations along with the Ford, Knight, MacArthur, and Mozilla Foundations publicly commit to ensuring the internet is bui

Susan Crawford appointed clinical professor of law at Harvard Law | Harv...
today.law.harvard.edu

Susan Crawford has been appointed clinical professor of law at Harvard Law School. She had been the John A. Reilly Visiting Professor in Int

SPARC Innovator: The Open Access Button | SPARC
www.sparc.arl.org

Before graduating, pharmacology student Joe McArthur and medical student David Carroll took for granted that they could read any scientific

Open Data to Open Knowledge
www.knightfoundation.org

Find out more about the work of the Knight Foundation's grantees

Book a Nook
www.knightfoundation.org

Find out more about the work of the Knight Foundation's grantees

Research Data Alliance/US and CENDI Federal Information Managers Group A...
rd-alliance.org

Washington DC – Last week in Washington DC, the Research Data Alliance/United States (RDA/US) and CENDI Federal Information Managers Group a