no plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
- Stevan has carefully read the updated polices.
The hosting and the sharing policies are still way to complex, they include too many "use cases" and they are rather is impenetrable for scholars, research institutions, and funders.
Let me highlight one issue only.
In his comment Stavan mentions the "automated copy-request Button", but it seems like the Elsevier policies are fine tuned to prohibit this service. Section "Guidance for non-commercial organizations and institutional repositories" of the hosting policy includes the following provision: "Manuscripts may not ((...)) be used to substitute for services provided directly by the journal, for example article aggregation, systematic distribution via e-mail lists or list servers or share buttons"May 4, 2015
- Thanks for this. You raise an interesting point. Assuming that this paragraph is meant to target the request eprint button I suspectwould argue that the request eprint button is effectively a "fair use/fair dealing" button, and so its use cannot be outlawed by publishers. But I would be interested in others' views on this.May 4, 2015
- The Button is a one-on-one eprint request, from one requestor, to the author, with one click each. It is not automatic. Nor is it article aggregation, systematic distribution or "share button" (as in research-index, academia.edu -- and Mendeley, till Elsevier bought it!) The lawyers are just trying to use and include every menacing word they don't understand.... Just ignore it.May 4, 2015