Meeting on Provisions in Licensing Incorporating new developments in daily licensing practice: Setting conditions for open access, patron driven access, and data & text mining

Following the workshop on new developments in daily licensing practice in November 2011, we brought together fourteen representatives from national consortia (from Denmark, Germany, Netherlands and the UK) and publishers (Elsevier, SAGE and Springer) met in Copenhagen on 9 March 2012 to discuss provisions in licences to accommodate new developments. The one day workshop aimed to: present background and ideas regarding the provisions KE Licensing Expert Group developed; introduce and explain the provisions the invited publishers currently use;ascertain agreement on the wording for long term preservation, continuous access and course packs; give insight and more clarity about the use of open access provisions in licences; discuss a roadmap for inclusion of the provisions in the publishers’ licences; result in report to disseminate the outcome of the meeting. Participants of the workshop were: United Kingdom: Lorraine Estelle (Jisc Collections) Denmark: Lotte Eivor Jørgensen (DEFF), Lone Madsen (Southern University of Denmark), Anne Sandfær (DEFF/Knowledge Exchange) Germany: Hildegard Schaeffler (Bavarian State Library), Markus Brammer (TIB) The Netherlands: Wilma Mossink (SURF), Nol Verhagen (University of Amsterdam), Marc Dupuis (SURF/Knowledge Exchange) Publishers: Alicia Wise (Elsevier), Yvonne Campfens (Springer), Bettina Goerner (Springer), Leo Walford (Sage) Knowledge Exchange: Keith Russell The main outcome of the workshop was that it would be valuable to have a standard set of clauses which could used in negotiations, this would make concluding licences a lot easier and more efficient. The comments on the model provisions the Licensing Expert group had drafted will be taken into account and the provisions will be reformulated. Data and text mining is a new development and demand for access to allow for this is growing. It would be easier if there was a simpler way to access materials so they could be more easily mined. However there are still outstanding questions on how authors of articles that have been mined can be properly attributed.

Scientific Data Application Profile Scoping Study

This study was undertaken by UKOLN on behalf of the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) in the period April to September 2008. Application profiles are metadata schemata which consist of data elements drawn from one or more namespaces, optimized for a particular local application. They offer a way for particular communities to base the interoperability specifications they create and use for their digital material on established open standards. This offers the potential for digital materials to be accessed, used and curated effectively both within and beyond the communities in which they were created. The JISC recognized the need to undertake a scoping study to investigate metadata application profile requirements for scientific data in relation to digital repositories, and specifically concerning descriptive metadata to support resource discovery and other functions such as preservation. This followed on from the development of the Scholarly Works Application Profile (SWAP) undertaken within the JISC Digital Repositories Programme and led by Andy Powell (Eduserv Foundation) and Julie Allinson (RRT UKOLN) on behalf of the JISC. Aims and Objectives 1.To assess whether a single metadata AP for research data, or a small number thereof, would improve resource discovery or discovery-to-delivery in any useful or significant way. 2.If so, then to:a.assess whether the development of such AP(s) is practical and if so, how much effort it would take; b.scope a community uptake strategy that is likely to be successful, identifying the main barriers and key stakeholders. 3.Otherwise, to investigate how best to improve cross-discipline, cross-community discovery-to-delivery for research data, and make recommendations to the JISC and others as appropriate. Approach The Study used a broad conception of what constitutes scientific data, namely data gathered, collated, structured and analysed using a recognizably scientific method, with a bias towards quantitative methods. The approach taken was to map out the landscape of existing data centres, repositories and associated projects, and conduct a survey of the discovery-to-delivery metadata they use or have defined, alongside any insights they have gained from working with this metadata. This was followed up by a series of unstructured interviews, discussing use cases for a Scientific Data Application Profile, and how widely a single profile might be applied. On the latter point, matters of granularity, the experimental/measurement contrast, the quantitative/qualitative contrast, the raw/derived data contrast, and the homogeneous/heterogeneous data collection contrast were discussed. The Study report was loosely structured according to the Singapore Framework for Dublin Core Application Profiles, and in turn considered: the possible use cases for a Scientific Data Application Profile; existing domain models that could either be used or adapted for use within such a profile; and a comparison existing metadata profiles and standards to identify candidate elements for inclusion in the description set profile for scientific data. The report also considered how the application profile might be implemented, its relationship to other application profiles, the alternatives to constructing a Scientific Data Application Profile, the development effort required, and what could be done to encourage uptake in the community. The conclusions of the Study were validated through a reference group of stakeholders.

Authority files: Breaking out of the library silo to become signposts for research information

Authority files serve to uniquely identify real world ‘things’ or entities like documents, persons, organisations, and their properties, like relations and features. Already important in the classical library world, authority files are indispensable for adequate information retrieval and analysis in the computer age. This is because, even more than humans, computers are poor at handling ambiguity. Through authority files, people tell computers which terms, names or numbers refer to the same thing or have the same meaning by giving equivalent notions the same identifier. Thus, authority files signpost the internet where these identifiers are interlinked on the basis of relevance. When executing a query, computers are able to navigate from identifier to identifier by following these links and collect the queried information on these so-called ‘crosswalks’. In this context, identifiers also go under the name controlled access points. Identifiers become even more crucial now massive data collections like library catalogues or research datasets are releasing their till-now contained data directly to the internet. This development is coined Open Linked Data. The concatenating name for the internet is Web of Data instead of the classical Web of Documents.

Open Access Business Models for Research Funders and Universities

This briefing paper offers insight into various open access business models, from institutional to subject repositories, from open access journals to research data and monographs. This overview shows that there is a considerable variety in business models within a common framework of public funding. Open access through institutional repositories requires funding from particular institutions to set up and maintain a repository, while subject repositories often require contributions from a number of institutions or funding agencies to maintain a subject repository hosted at one institution. Open access through publication in open access journals generally requires a mix of funding sources to meet the cost of publishing. Public or charitable research funding bodies may contribute part of the cost of publishing in an open access journal but institutions also meet part of the cost, particularly when the author does not have a research grant from a research funding body

Legal Status of Research Data in the four partner countries

This report compares the legal status of research data in the four KE partner countries. The report also addresses where European copyright and database law poses flaws and obstacles to the access to research data and singles out pre-conditions for openly available data. Background of the study Intellectual property right regulations regarding primary research data are a recurrent topic in the discussion on the improvement of access to research data. In fact in the final report of the High Level Expert Group on Scientific Data ‘Riding the Wave’ creating clarity on this was considered very important in improving awareness for all parties involved. According to the recommendations of the report legal issues should be “worked out so that they encourage, and not impede, global data sharing” http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/e-infrastructure/docs/hlg-sdi-report.pdf. While open access to research data is a widely recognised goal, achieving it remains a challenge. As European national laws still diverge and sometimes remain unclear it can be difficult for interested parties to fully comprehend in which ways open access to research data can be legally obtained. Based on these discussions the Knowledge Exchange working group on primary research data has commissioned a comparative report on the legal status of research data in the four KE partner countries. The study has been conducted by the Centre for Intellectual Property Law (CIER) at Utrecht University. The report aims at informing Knowledge Exchange and associated stakeholders on the state of the law concerning access to research data in the KE partner countries (Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom) and to give an insight in how these laws work in practice. This is explained in several characteristic situations pertaining to open access to research data. The purpose of the report is to identify flaws and obstacles to the access to research data and to single out pre-conditions for openly available data. This is in view of the current discussions concerning open access to research data, especially those originating from publicly funded research. The report intends to be both a description of the status quo of the legislation and a practical instrument to prepare further activities in raising awareness on the potential benefit of improved access to research data, and developing means to support the improved access for research purposes