Open access to judgments : Creative Commons licences and the Australian courts

Internet technologies have fundamentally changed the way we obtain access to legal documents and information about the law. However, for judgments of courts and tribunals, copyright management and licensing practices have not kept pace with the digital and online technologies which are now ubiquitous in the web 2.0 era. Under the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968 and the licensing statements on the Australian courts’ websites, judgments may generally be read online, downloaded, reproduced and printed out for personal, non-commercial use or ”in house” use by an organisation. However, beyond these permitted acts, the extent to which judgments can be copied and distributed in digital form online remains unclear. Open content licences (in particular, the Creative Commons (CC) licences) offer an effective mechanism for managing copyright in judgments in a manner that supports their wide public dissemination and reuse while also protecting their integrity and accuracy.

Open Access Books

Although digital technology has, in theory, made it possible for many more people to access content at no extra cost, fewer people than ever before are able to read the books written by university-based researchers. This article looks, very briefly, at the role that open access licenses might play in reviving the scholarly monograph: a specialised area of academic publishing that has seen sales decline by more than 90% over the past three decades. It also introduces a new approach to funding open-access scholarly books being pioneered by the not-for-profit social enterprise Knowledge Unlatched.

Open access for scholarly books : policy and practice

Fierce debates have characterised 2013 as the implications of government mandates for open access have been debated and pathways for implementation worked out. There is no doubt that journals will move to a mix of gold and green and there will be an unsettled relationship between the two. But what of books? Is it conceivable that in those subjects, such as in the humanities and social sciences, where something longer than the journal article is still the preferred form of scholarly communications that these will stay closed? Will it be acceptable to have some publicly funded research made available only in closed book form (regardless of whether print or digital) while other subjects where articles are favoured go open access? Frances Pinter is in the middle of these debates, having founded Knowledge Unlatched (see www.knowledgeunlatched.org). KU is a global library consortium enabling open access books. Knowledge Unlatched is helping libraries to work together for a sustainable open future for specialist academic books. Its vision is a healthy market that includes free access for end users. In this session she will review all the different models that are being experimented with around the world. These include author-side payments, institutional subsidies, research funding body approaches etc. She will compare and contrast these models with those that are already in place for journal articles. She will also review the policy landscape and report on how open access scholarly books are faring to date Frances Pinter, Founder, Knowledge Unlatched, UK

Data innovation and open access [Blog]

After nearly fifteen years of the open access (OA) movement and its hard-fought struggle for a more open scholarly communication system, publishers are realizing that business models can be both open and profitable. Making journal articles available on an OA license is becoming an accepted strategy for maximizing the value of content to both research communities and the businesses that serve them. The first blog in this two-part series celebrating Data Innovation Day looks at the role that data-innovation is playing in the shift to open access for journal articles.

Open Access and Research Conference 2013: Discovery, Impact and Innovation (Event report)

Event report on the Open Access and Research 2013 conference which focused on recent developments and the strategic advantages they bring to the research sector.

Open access to infinite content (or "in praise of law reviews")

This Article is about legal scholarly publication in a time of plenitude. It is an attempt to explain why the most pressing questions in legal scholarly publishing are about how we ensure access to an infinity of content. It explains why standard assumptions about resource scarcity in publication are wrong in general, and how the changes in the modality of publication affect legal scholarship. It talks about the economics of open access to legal material, and how this connects to a future where there is infinite content. And because student-edited law reviews fit this future better than their commercially-produced, peer-refereed cousins, this Article is, in part, a defense of the crazy-beautiful institution that is the American law review.

Creating a legal framework for copyright management of open access within the Australian academic and research sector

This chapter analyses the copyright law framework needed to ensure open access to outputs of the Australian academic and research sector such as journal articles and theses. It overviews the new knowledge landscape, the principles of copyright law, the concept of open access to knowledge, the recently developed open content models of copyright licensing and the challenges faced in providing greater access to knowledge and research outputs.

Knowledge unlatched: A global library consortium model for funding open access scholarly books: Full report on the Proof of Concept Pilot 2014

This special issue of Cultural Science Journal is devoted to the report of a groundbreaking experiment in re-coordinating global markets for specialist scholarly books and enabling the knowledge commons: the Knowledge Unlatched proof-of-concept pilot. The pilot took place between January 2012 and September 2014. It involved libraries, publishers, authors, readers and research funders in the process of developing and testing a global library consortium model for supporting Open Access books. The experiment established that authors, librarians, publishers and research funding agencies can work together in powerful new ways to enable open access; that doing so is cost effective; and that a global library consortium model has the potential dramatically to widen access to the knowledge and ideas contained in book-length scholarly works.

Open access and soft power: Chinese voices in international scholarship

Networked digital technologies and Open Access (OA) are transforming the processes and institutions of research, knowledge creation and dissemination globally: enabling new forms of collaboration, allowing researchers to be seen and heard in new ways and reshaping relationships between stakeholders across the global academic publishing system. This article draws on Joseph Nye’s concept of ‘Soft Power’ to explore the role that OA is playing in helping to reshape academic publishing in China. It focusses on two important areas of OA development: OA journals and national-level repositories. OA is being supported at the highest levels, and there is potential for it to play an important role in increasing the status and impact of Chinese scholarship. Investments in OA also have the potential to help China to re-position itself within international copyright discourses: moving beyond criticism for failure to enforce the rights of foreign copyright owners and progressing an agenda that places greater emphasis on equality of access to the resources needed to foster innovation. However, the potential for OA to help China to build and project its soft power is being limited by the legacies of the print era, as well as the challenges of efficiently governing the national research and innovation systems.

Open-access more harm than good in developing world

The traditional 'publish for free and pay to read' business model adopted by publishers of academic journals can lead to disparity in access to scholarly literature, exacerbated by rising journal costs and shrinking library budgets. However, although the 'pay to publish and read for free' business model of open-access publishing has helped to create a level playing field for readers, it does more harm than good in the developing world.

Open Access to Scientific Publications – An Analysis of the Barriers to Change?

One of the effects of the Internet is that the dissemination of scientific publications in a few years has migrated to electronic formats. The basic business practices between libraries and publishers for selling and buying the content, however, have not changed much. In protest against the high subscription prices of mainstream publishers, scientists have started Open Access (OA) journals and e-print repositories, which distribute scientific information freely. Despite widespread agreement among academics that OA would be the optimal distribution mode for publicly financed research results, such channels still constitute only a marginal phenomenon in the global scholarly communication system. This paper discusses, in view of the experiences of the last ten years, the many barriers hindering a rapid proliferation of Open Access. The discussion is structured according to the main OA channels; peer-reviewed journals for primary publishing, subject- specific and institutional repositories for secondary parallel publishing. It also discusses the types of barriers, which can be classified as consisting of the legal framework, the information technology infrastructure, business models, indexing services and standards, the academic reward system, marketing, and critical mass.

Two Scenarios for How Scholarly Publishers Could Change Their Business Model to Open Access

The Internet has made possible the cost-effective dissemination of scientific journals in the form of electronic versions, usually in parallel with the printed versions. At the same time the electronic medium also makes possible totally new open access (OA) distribution models, funded by author charges, sponsorship, advertising, voluntary work, etc., where the end product is free in full text to the readers. Although more than 2,000 new OA journals have been founded in the last 15 years, the uptake of open access has been rather slow, with currently around 5% of all peer-reviewed articles published in OA journals. The slow growth can to a large extent be explained by the fact that open access has predominantly emerged via newly founded journals and startup publishers. Established journals and publishers have not had strong enough incentives to change their business models, and the commercial risks in doing so have been high. In this paper we outline and discuss two different scenarios for how scholarly publishers could change their operating model to open access. The first is based on an instantaneous change and the second on a gradual change. We propose a way to manage the gradual change by bundling traditional “big deal” licenses and author charges for opening access to individual articles.

Two Scenarios for How Scholarly Publishers Could Change Their Business Model to Open Access

The Internet has made possible the cost-effective dissemination of scientific journals in the form of electronic versions, usually in parallel with the printed versions. At the same time the electronic medium also makes possible totally new open access (OA) distribution models, funded by author charges, sponsorship, advertising, voluntary work, etc., where the end product is free in full text to the readers. Although more than 2,000 new OA journals have been founded in the last 15 years, the uptake of open access has been rather slow, with currently around 5% of all peer-reviewed articles published in OA journals. The slow growth can to a large extent be explained by the fact that open access has predominantly emerged via newly founded journals and startup publishers. Established journals and publishers have not had strong enough incentives to change their business models, and the commercial risks in doing so have been high. In this paper we outline and discuss two different scenarios for how scholarly publishers could change their operating model to open access. The first is based on an instantaneous change and the second on a gradual change. We propose a way to manage the gradual change by bundling traditional “big deal” licenses and author charges for opening access to individual articles.

OPEN DOORS AND OPEN MINDS: WHAT FACULTY AUTHORS CAN DO TO ENSURE OPEN ACCESS TO THEIR WORK THROUGH THEIR INSTITUTION

The Internet has brought unparalleled opportunities for expanding availability of research by bringing down economic and physical barriers to sharing. The digitally networked environment promises to democratize access, carry knowledge beyond traditional research niches, accelerate discovery, encourage new and interdisciplinary approaches to ever more complex research challenges, and enable new computational research strategies. However, despite these opportunities for increasing access to knowledge, the prices of scholarly journals have risen sharply over the past two decades, often forcing libraries to cancel subscriptions. Today even the wealthiest institutions cannot afford to sustain all of the journals needed by their faculties and students. To take advantage of the opportunities created by the Internet and to further their mission of creating, preserving, and disseminating knowledge, many academic institutions are taking steps to capture the benefits of more open research sharing. Colleges and universities have built digital repositories to preserve and distribute faculty scholarly articles and other research outputs. Many individual authors have taken steps to retain the rights they need, under copyright law, to allow their work to be made freely available on the Internet and in their institutionâ s repository. And, faculties at some institutions have adopted resolutions endorsing more open access to scholarly articles. Most recently, on February 12, 2008, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) at Harvard University took a landmark step. The faculty voted to adopt a policy requiring that faculty authors send an electronic copy of their scholarly articles to the universityâ s digital repository and that faculty authors automatically grant copyright permission to the university to archive and to distribute these articles unless a faculty member has waived the policy for a particular article. Essentially, the faculty voted to make open access to the results of their published journal articles the default policy for the Faculty of Arts and Sciences of Harvard University. As of March 2008, a proposal is also under consideration in the University of California system by which faculty authors would commit routinely to grant copyright permission to the university to make copies of the facultyâ s scholarly work openly accessible over the Internet. Inspired by the example set by the Harvard faculty, this White Paper is addressed to the faculty and administrators of academic institutions who support equitable access to scholarly research and knowledge, and who believe that the institution can play an important role as steward of the scholarly literature produced by its faculty. This paper discusses both the motivation and the process for establishing a binding institutional policy that automatically grants a copyright license from each faculty member to permit deposit of his or her peer-reviewed scholarly articles in institutional repositories, from which the works become available for others to read and cite.