RoMEO Studies 4: An analysis of Journal Publishers' Copyright Agreements
| dc.contributor.author | Gadd, Elizabeth | |
| dc.contributor.author | Oppenheim, Charles | |
| dc.contributor.author | Probets, Steve | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2004-12-08T00:00:01Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2010-06-18T23:20:08Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2003 | en_US |
| dc.date.submitted | 2004-12-08 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | RoMEO Studies 4: An analysis of Journal Publishers' Copyright Agreements 2003, | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105141 | |
| dc.description.abstract | This article is the fourth in a series of six emanating from the UK JISC-funded RoMEO Project (Rights Metadata for Open archiving). It describes an analysis of 80 scholarly journal publishers' copyright agreements with a particular view to their effect on author self-archiving. 90% of agreements asked for copyright transfer and 69% asked for it prior to refereeing the paper. 75% asked authors to warrant that their work had not been previously published although only two explicitly stated that they viewed self-archiving as prior publication. 28.5% of agreements provided authors with no usage rights over their own paper. Although 42.5% allowed self-archiving in some format, there was no consensus on the conditions under which self-archiving could take place. The article concludes that author-publisher copyright agreements should be reconsidered by a working party representing the needs of both parties. This article has been accepted for publication in Learned Publishing, 16 (4) October 2003. | |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.subject | Scholarly Communication | en_US |
| dc.title | RoMEO Studies 4: An analysis of Journal Publishers' Copyright Agreements | en_US |
| dc.type | Report | en_US |
| refterms.dateFOA | 2018-06-25T11:02:54Z | |
| html.description.abstract | This article is the fourth in a series of six emanating from the UK JISC-funded RoMEO Project (Rights Metadata for Open archiving). It describes an analysis of 80 scholarly journal publishers' copyright agreements with a particular view to their effect on author self-archiving. 90% of agreements asked for copyright transfer and 69% asked for it prior to refereeing the paper. 75% asked authors to warrant that their work had not been previously published although only two explicitly stated that they viewed self-archiving as prior publication. 28.5% of agreements provided authors with no usage rights over their own paper. Although 42.5% allowed self-archiving in some format, there was no consensus on the conditions under which self-archiving could take place. The article concludes that author-publisher copyright agreements should be reconsidered by a working party representing the needs of both parties. This article has been accepted for publication in Learned Publishing, 16 (4) October 2003. |
