$30 off During Our Annual Pro Sale. View Details »

Project Zero: status & challenges for the Secondary Publishing Right

Project Zero: status & challenges for the Secondary Publishing Right

Presentation of the preliminary findings of the survey that has been conducted by LIBER in the frame of the Arcadia funded Knowledge Rights 21 program in the "Open Science & AI: a UK policy discussion" event at Tuesday 25th April 2023 in Friends House, London.

Giannis Tsakonas

May 10, 2023
Tweet

More Decks by Giannis Tsakonas

Other Decks in Science

Transcript

  1. Project Zero
    status & challenges for the Secondary Publishing Right
    Dr. Giannis Tsakonas, LIBER / University of Patras, Greece
    [email protected] / @gtsakonas
    Open Science & AI: a UK policy discussion / Tuesday 25th April 2023 / Friends House, London

    View Slide

  2. Aim
    • To specify successful cases of national SPR
    legislation and identify the workflow to it.
    • Further, to figure out the effect of the existent laws
    and to determine the obstacles to overcome in
    countries that do not have such legislation.
    • Survey of the countries that have SPR in their
    legislation (orange), plus countries that have strong
    OA policies (blue). International stakeholders’ opinion
    was taken also into account.
    • A complex issue expressed as the combination of
    Copyright and Open Access aspects.

    View Slide

  3. Environment
    • Several countries have stated their will to reach 100% of OA via many roads.
    • Growing concerns about the cost of Gold OA & reuse
    • European Union
    • Horizon Europe Grant Agreement terms
    • ERA: propose an EU copyright & data legislative and regulatory framework fit for
    research
    • Strong Council of EU conclusions statements (June 2022 & February 2023)
    • OSTP, US: Ensuring free, immediate, and equitable access to federally funded research
    • Supporting statements from organizations
    • LIBER (#ZeroEmbargo model law) / ALLEA / CESAER / LERU

    View Slide

  4. Secondary Publishing
    Nations
    Rights Retention
    RPO & RFO
    Sorting the concepts
    ,
    Implementation & Monitoring
    RPO & Libraries
    idea > expression
    manifestation 1 : pre-print
    manifestation 2 : AAM Embargoes in STEM/HSS

    View Slide

  5. Anatomy of an SPR article
    The author of a scientific contribution …. [extend of
    funding] …. [embargo period] …. [format] …. [purpose]
    …. [citation of first source].
    • Additional elements:
    • Definition of periodical (e.g., twice per year)
    • Range/Relationships of beneficiaries
    • Status of the article
    • Critical: republishing without licensing
    P NC NC NC
    C + + + +
    F AAM AAM AAM AAM
    EF 50% 50% 50% * 50% * 50%
    EP > 12 > 12 < 12/6 0 > 12/6 * < 12/6
    AT DE FR SP BE NL IT
    DP 2 2 1
    RB + + +
    SA NW

    View Slide

  6. Reasons
    • To protect the author
    • not compensated; both on the production & the
    consumption stage
    • disproportionate power of the publishers
    • To allow the public to access scientific publications
    / But the original concept was, that
    in general, makers of creative
    work should be more protected
    and have more rights.
    / I think that this article was to
    make the research more
    transparent first, and that the
    public funded research could be
    available for every citizen.

    View Slide

  7. Context
    • Legal framework
    • Science law – Education & Research (FR, SP)
    • Copyright law – Justice (AT, DE, NL) or Culture (IT)
    • Economic law – Finances (BE)
    • Primarily a need of RPOs for alignment with EU (with
    OA policies and through the DSM transposition)
    • Stakeholders
    • Structure: Ministries, Councils of Rectors, Research
    Councils, Councils of IP, Library Associations, etc.
    • Skills: might be missing from crucial stages.
    / I don't know that many experts
    that are working on copyright
    from the view of a user and with
    the user, I mean institutional
    user, like a repository, like
    university, et cetera. In most
    cases, they really look at it from
    the view of the rights holder…

    View Slide

  8. Engagement
    • Opposition during consultation (SP, IT)
    • Lack of engagement by RPOs
    • Uncoordinated stakeholders
    • Not of high priority when embedded in broader laws
    • Support in policy making bodies might be
    circumstantial (AT, BE)
    / The word of the university and
    the public sector was in favor of
    the proposal, but the influence of
    the universities is very low. We
    don't have a strong organization
    defending the interest of Italian
    University.

    View Slide

  9. Implementation
    • Follow up policies and laws; linking with Research
    Assessment and RFO Calls.
    • Uneven implementation in Federal systems (DE, BE)
    • The contractual law is often stronger (DE, SP)
    • No clarity about the rights holders of the works.
    • Reversed thinking: from what is actionable to what is
    reasonable.
    • Opt-In (enable) vs Opt-Out (oblige) signals the
    determination to implement.
    / The fact is that the article in the
    law is a recommendation. There
    is no control and no paying fee if
    you don't reach the law. It's not
    an obligation. It's not really
    strong for law, you know?

    View Slide

  10. Solutions
    • Harmonization as an opportunity to solve national
    (institutional policies & law) and international
    (countries) unevenness and weakness.
    • needs to be detailed; with mandatory provisions
    • silent harmonization (SP adopting Horizon
    Europe GA)
    • The need for a special legislative framework for
    research & education
    / … you'd have to decide how
    detailed you want the proposal to
    be. The trouble with not being
    detailed is that, if you adopt an
    EU level proposal that's not
    detailed, you are inviting in this
    harmonization, you're inviting in
    the ultimate result of 27 different
    secondary publication rights.

    View Slide

  11. Concerns
    • Is the matter of OA growth a Copyright or a Market
    problem?
    • Licensing the republished work or ‘pre-licensing’ a
    work?
    • To which extend we can base the claim for SPR on the
    moral right?
    • Does the SPR pass the three-step test?
    / The challenge here is that for
    Member States there's not a lot
    of appetite to propose and
    pursue EU legislation on this
    topic, since it's a multi-year
    effort that requires a lot of
    effort. Of course, there is very
    strong lobbying against this by
    the for-profit publisher
    community.

    View Slide

  12. Conclusions
    • It is difficult to see SPR belonging to a distinct field. It is
    both a Copyright and an Open Access topic.
    • Principles-driven actionable process.
    • Coordinated action on all levels; key stakeholders need to
    take initiatives to increase political support.
    • Skill building of the stakeholders & monitoring of the
    legislative process is essential.
    • Implementation roadmap per country is linked to
    resources; strong mandates, skilled persons, funds,
    infrastructures.
    • Compromises should be mitigated by a new
    acknowledgements & rewards system.
    / It's better to have a poor law and
    a good implementation than a
    good law and no implementation

    View Slide

  13. Thank you
    for your attention

    View Slide