On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Jane H Smith wrote:
> Thanks for highlighting this change to the Royal Society policy, I shall
> update RoMEO ASAP.
>
> After an initial check it looks like they are now Yellow in the RoMEO
> colour scheme.
The SHERPA-Romeo listing for the Royal Society this morning before my
posting was,
as I said, Green. It was updated after my posting (note the update notice) . The
text is now self-contradictory and makes no sense:
Publisher: Royal Society, The
Author's Pre-print: author can archive pre-print (ie pre-refereeing)
Author's Post-print: subject to Restrictions below, author can archive
post-print (ie final draft post-refereeing)
Restrictions:
* 12 months
Publisher's Version/PDF: author cannot archive publisher's version/PDF
General Conditions:
* May post pre-print on preprint servers or websites
* Post print on author or institutional website, institutional or not for
profit repository
* Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
* Published source must be acknowledged with citation close to title
of article
* Must link to publisher version close to title of article
* If funding agency rules apply, authors may post articles in PubMed
Central 12
months after publication
* Articles in all journals can be made Open Access on payment of additional
charge
* Eligible UK authors may deposit in The Depot (after 12 months)
Mandated OA: Compliance data is available for 15 funders
Paid open access: EXIS Open Choice
http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/EXiS.xhtml
Copyright: Policy
http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/licence.xhtml
Updated: 22-Jun-2010. Suggest an update for this record
> Regards
>
> Jane H Smith
> SHERPA Services Development Officer
> Centre for Research Communications
>
> Tel: 01159514341
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
> [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On
> Behalf Of Stevan Harnad
> Sent: 22 June 2010 13:31
> To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
> Subject: Re: Royal Society Publishing and Open Access
>
> I have a question about the Royal Society's Open Access policy.
> According to SHERPA Romeo, the RS is green, meaning it has formally
> endorsed the self-archiving of the author's final, refereed draft, in
> the author's institutional repository, immediately upon acceptance for
> publication.
>
> But in the RS FAQ, the RS misdefines Green OA as follows:
>
> "Green open access:
> Authors may deposit a pre-print of their article in a repository at any
> time and they may deposit the final, accepted manuscript version of
> their article in a repository from 12 months after publication."
> http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/EXiS.xhtml#question1
>
> This needs to be clarified. For whereas one can be agnostic about the
> hybrid gold OA option that the RS and many publishers are offering
> (including the promise of transparency in translating hybrid Gold OA
> uptake increases into subscription price reductions), this takes on an
> entirely different complexion *if the publisher is not green* (as, for
> example, CUP, APS, IOP, AAAS, Springer and Elsevier all are, whereas OUP
> and NPG, and now possibly the RS, are not).
>
> For if the publisher imposes a 1-year embargo, that is tantamount to a
> constraint -- on any author that needs and wants immediate OA -- to pay
> for the hybrid Gold OA option instead of just providing Green OA.
>
> Whereas the hybrid gold OA option per se is an innocent enough
> development on the part of green publishers, not only transparency but
> very explicit exposure, naming and shaming will be necessary for those
> non-green publishers who try to use embargoes on Green OA to leverage
> hybrid gold OA options.
>
> Stevan Harnad
Received on Tue Jun 22 2010 - 16:42:06 BST