archive-org.com » ORG » S » STM-ASSOC.ORG

Total: 597

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • International Association of STM Publishers
    Publishers Committee Industry Survey 2014 Mentoring Scheme Careers Development Communications Committee Multimedia Web Competition Press Room Standards Technology Future Lab Committee Executive Committee STEC Partner Organisations Resources Standards Research4Life Outreach patientINFORM Research4Life Programmes Events Upcoming Events 17th February STM Early Career Publishers Speed Networking Event London 24th February Who counts Metrics in use by authors institutions funders and publishers 6th to 9th March 9th Intensive Course in Journal Publishing Asia

    Original URL path: http://www.stm-assoc.org/industry-news/european-commission-may-compel-isps-to-combat-users-ip-infringement/ (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive


  • International Association of STM Publishers
    Permissions Licensing Litigation Settlements Public Affairs Committee Resources Early Career Publishers Committee Industry Survey 2014 Mentoring Scheme Careers Development Communications Committee Multimedia Web Competition Press Room Standards Technology Future Lab Committee Executive Committee STEC Partner Organisations Resources Standards Research4Life Outreach patientINFORM Research4Life Programmes Events Upcoming Events 17th February STM Early Career Publishers Speed Networking Event London 24th February Who counts Metrics in use by authors institutions funders and publishers 6th

    Original URL path: http://www.stm-assoc.org/industry-news/wiley-blackwell-adds-102-products-through-research4life/ (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • International Association of STM Publishers
    Communications Committee Multimedia Web Competition Press Room Standards Technology Future Lab Committee Executive Committee STEC Partner Organisations Resources Standards Research4Life Outreach patientINFORM Research4Life Programmes Events Upcoming Events 17th February STM Early Career Publishers Speed Networking Event London 24th February Who counts Metrics in use by authors institutions funders and publishers 6th to 9th March 9th Intensive Course in Journal Publishing Asia 2016 26th to 28th April STM Annual US Conference

    Original URL path: http://www.stm-assoc.org/industry-news/stm-responds-to-america-competes-act-public-access-provision/ (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • International Association of STM Publishers
    Litigation Settlements Public Affairs Committee Resources Early Career Publishers Committee Industry Survey 2014 Mentoring Scheme Careers Development Communications Committee Multimedia Web Competition Press Room Standards Technology Future Lab Committee Executive Committee STEC Partner Organisations Resources Standards Research4Life Outreach patientINFORM Research4Life Programmes Events Upcoming Events 17th February STM Early Career Publishers Speed Networking Event London 24th February Who counts Metrics in use by authors institutions funders and publishers 6th to 9th

    Original URL path: http://www.stm-assoc.org/industry-news/president-obama-signs-america-competes/ (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • International Association of STM Publishers
    Society Membership Program Committee STM Topics Copyright Legal Affairs Committee Enforcement Task Force Infringement Piracy Permissions Licensing Litigation Settlements Public Affairs Committee Resources Early Career Publishers Committee Industry Survey 2014 Mentoring Scheme Careers Development Communications Committee Multimedia Web Competition Press Room Standards Technology Future Lab Committee Executive Committee STEC Partner Organisations Resources Standards Research4Life Outreach patientINFORM Research4Life Programmes Events Upcoming Events 17th February STM Early Career Publishers Speed Networking Event London 24th February Who counts Metrics in use by authors institutions funders and publishers 6th to 9th March 9th Intensive Course in Journal Publishing Asia 2016 26th to 28th April STM Annual US Conference 2016 18th October STM Frankfurt Conference 2016 6th December STM Digital Publishing 2016 7th December Innovations Seminar 2016 8th December STM Week 2016 Day 3 Other Events Past Events Industry Events Documents Press Members Area STM Consultations SCN Article Sharing Consultation 2015 Endorsements Submissions Home STM Consultations SCN Article Sharing Consultation 2015 Endorsements Endorsements The following organisations have endorsed the framework presented in the Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks To add your endorsement please email the name of your organisation to mckay stm assoc org This list will be updated periodically The

    Original URL path: http://www.stm-assoc.org/stm-consultations/scn-consultation-2015/endorsements/ (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • International Association of STM Publishers
    journals Another way to reach particular communities of scholars is through alerts to the article content of issues of the journal The survey also might be shared with the existing ethnopolitics distribution list which provides feedback to both RC 14 members and members of the Political Studies Association special group on ethnopolitics John H Harvey All of these points make sense to and I support them John Harvey Editor J of Loss Trauma Taylor Francis Publishers John Hellerman Q What impact do you think a unified approach to scholarly article sharing would have It is not entirely clear what is meant by unified If it means that the submission peer review and revision process is standardized that would be great Q Do you have other ideas about how the sharing of scholarly research should function within the research community I would like to see our field break away from for profit publishers and move to fully online peer reviewed journals that get the little support server space and clerical staff from publicly funded universities I write this as an editor of a journal published by Oxford University Press The money a university would save in subscription fees would go a long way toward supporting the infrastructure necessary to publish a journal That money may in fact cover the costs completely Q It is our aim to continue to refine the thinking and approach to article sharing What feedback or guidance can you offer for further consideration or to help next steps Correct me if I am wrong but the main obstacle to article sharing is copyright Academics who publish research in scholarly journals get no financial compensation for that publication There is only prestige involved in publishing in some journals For senior scholars at least for me this prestige means little I am just happy to read peer reviewed research and have mine be read Q Would your organization be willing to actively participate and contribute to this process Perhaps if it doesn t take too much time Q Do you support the initial outline Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks As far as these principles go they would make things better than the status quo but it really does very little to fix the core problem the profit model getting in the way of knowledge dissemination Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe Q What impact do you think a unified approach to scholarly article sharing would have While I applaud the motivation to ensure a baseline of expectations that enables sharing and the positive aspects in that I am concerned that such a unified approach as it is currently proposed will be interpreted as the maximum limits of what is allowed rather than a set of minimum expectations of what publishers should enable and expect If this sets a maximum limit it will ultimately be then a negative impact rather than the positive intended Individual authors should be free to negotiate for more extensive sharing rights and indeed some publishers already offer more than what is describe in the principles and it would be a great disappointment if the idea of a unified approach is used as a counter to such requests or decrease what is already offered Q Do you have other ideas about how the sharing of scholarly research should function within the research community The research community is much more inclusive than the academic groups described The FAQ comments on corporate researchers and the like I would mention the development of citizen science and the increasing emphasis on exchange between academics and citizen science Limiting sharing to academic groups posits a reality that does not map to the kinds of groups current and emerging on campuses Likewise academic groups does not account for the critically important public engagement function of the extension services of our land grant universities particularly with regard to applied science in agricultural practice Q It is our aim to continue to refine the thinking and approach to article sharing What feedback or guidance can you offer for further consideration or to help next steps I hope that all who comment will be contacted directly during next steps This might be a good place to mention that measuring amount and type of sharing should be done in ways that also allow individuals to protect their personal privacy and the competitive advantage of their work e g such tracking should not reveal research agendas within a group that might impede their ability to claim first mover advantage in applying for grant funding for example Q Would your organization be willing to actively participate and contribute to this process I am responding as an individual not for an organization but as an individual I can affirm that I am willing to participate and contribute Q Do you support the initial outline Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks I support its role in generating discussion but not the text as written primarily due to concerns articulated in response to Q1 Max M Houck and Jay A Siegel Q What impact do you think a unified approach to scholarly article sharing would have There is potentially a major impact There is so much being published today in so many journals some of which are quite similar in content that it is difficult if not impossible to maintain currency in one s field Some journals publish material that would be useful to certain researchers but the journal s reach may not be sufficient to catch researchers attention A unified approach to scholarly article sharing has the potential for being a major catalyst to information sharing in general Q Do you have other ideas about how the sharing of scholarly research should function within the research community We have some concerns about how research sharing might be implemented First there is the overarching problem that by and large publishers seek a profit in publishing research Authors do not get paid for publishing research in jou als they benefit from the exposure and the mechanism of asserting primacy over the research area and topic This all leads to copyright issues and thus to sharing issues These hurdles must be overcome if there is to be effective sharing of scholarly research There is also the issue of who shall be able to view and interact with shared material The Voluntary Principles speak of having to be invited to share by an individual researcher This is too restrictive and can lead to a silo effect Research sharing must shift focus to the sharee and not the sharer There also needs to be more thought about what information will be shared Too little and the sharing loses its value Too much and there are potential copyright and piracy issues Whatever mechanism is chosen to promote sharing must also promote dialogue that fosters continuing exchanges about the research to help refine issues and concerns This is the crux of information sharing We don t just want to make iinformation available we want to encourage collaborations Q It is our aim to continue to refine the thinking and approach to article sharing What feedback or guidance can you offer for further consideration or to help next steps We would like to see the Voluntary Principles document fleshed out and we would like to get more information from journal publishers concerning their attitudes and concerns about research sharing The research community needs to have the cooperation of the journal publishers to make any meaningful progress A dialogue between researchers and publishers must take place Q Would your organization be willing to actively participate and contribute to this process Our publisher Taylor Francis has already signed on to the Voluntary Principles document Our Journal would certainly be willing to contribute to the process of scholarly research sharing Q Do you support the initial outline Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks We support it as far as it goes The issues of copyright and access must be settled and the guidelines need more fleshing out There is also the concern that the principles not become so prescriptive that a new bureaucracy needs to be created to manage sharing Flexibility is a core principle that needs to be incorporated Max M Houck and Jay A Siegel Editors Forensic Science Policy and Management An International Journal ICE Publishing Thank you for your invitation to contribute to the above consultation process I enclose the comments of ICE Publishing a division of Thomas Telford Ltd the commercial subsidiary of the Institution of Civil Engineers Q What impact do you think a unified approach to scholarly article sharing would have A modest but positive one it would acknowledge that authors regularly informally share their published work with peers Q Do you have other ideas about how the sharing of scholarly research should function within the research community It is not necessary to engineer this simply to empower researchers Social media has already enabled the sharing of scholarly research Q It is our aim to continue to refine the thinking and approach to article sharing What feedback or guidance can you offer for further consideration or to help next steps It would be useful to recognise that authors regularly share PDFs with peers outside their research group This is different to the wholesale copying of content that occurs when a website is hacked STM could prepare realistic guidelines on what publishers regard as for personal use and for commercial use For example ICE Publishing protects reprint revenue by defining the latter as greater than 50 copies including work in a second party mailing such as an e newsletter This is essentially an expansion of STM Permissions Guidelines Q Would your organization be willing to actively participate and contribute to this process Yes Q Do you support the initial outline Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks Yes IOP Publishing Q What impact do you think a unified approach to scholarly article sharing would have Scholarly article sharing is a recognised part of research A unified approach with clear guidelines would simplify the process and make it clearer for users what they can and cannot do with the articles whilst at the same time facilitating scientific discussion Q Do you have other ideas about how the sharing of scholarly research should function within the research community It needs to be as simple as possible Traditionally it was quite common to share paper versions of articles to facilitate discussion within groups The social networks are aiming to do this electronically but there is not a clear delineation between sharing for the purposes of a specific research group and simply making content publicly accessible The two are not the same There also has to be enough flexibility to enable the different research communities to find solutions that will work for them For example it might be very different in an interdisciplinary subject area than a niche area Using the metadata see below SCNs could be a great opportunity to better understand the way that scholarly articles are shared across the different networks Q It is our aim to continue to refine the thinking and approach to article sharing What feedback or guidance can you offer for further consideration or to help next steps We need to make sure that a mechanism for feedback is built into the process and make it clear that this will need to be an iterative process with input from the different groups Keeping the process as transparent as possible would be beneficial It would also be good to have some reporting back from the SCNs Many publishers now include XMP http en wikipedia org wiki Extensible Metadata Platform in the Versions of Record of their PDF articles This is metadata used by CrossMark to display various attributes of an article The sort of data included is this Journal title Nanotechnology Article type note Article title High resolution AFM in liquid what about the tip Copyright information 2015 IOP Publishing Ltd Publication dates Online publication date 2015 02 17 Ideally SCNs could be reporting on this data to publishers giving us a report on what data is stored in the networks and how much of it is being shared Q Would your organization be willing to actively participate and contribute to this process IOP Publishing would like to contribute where possible Unfortunately we may not have the resource available for active participation in the initial stages Q Do you support the STM s initial outline Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks Yes IOP Publishing supports the voluntary principles Paul Johnston So I guess it s not 1997 anymore when researchers were sharing PDFs on their academic homepages like http lab department university edu 8080 msmith01 papers misc nature2131 pdf As much as we all liked free music from napster it wasn t legal It seems inevitable that major publishers will unify against these networks with significant legal copyright claims that I would guess are quite defensible The question is at what cost both in terms of time legal fees and additional negative press this would result I support the voluntary principles here if only to clarify the position of what is and is not acceptable practice and to galvanize the research community and the societies that represent them to be better informed about where and how they publish If you publish with a journal having a paywall and all that implies then you have made that decision and it is probably not acceptable to re publish the final published PDF on academic networks that are designed to distribute that efficiently how exactly you define this I am not certain because the internet itself satisfies that definition When one chooses to publish with non open access journals this is a significant choice that I don t think many researchers consider strongly enough yet When drafting their hypotheses they should also select the CC BY license they believe best satisfies their requirements or not select one with eyes wide open Terry Logan Q What impact do you think a unified approach to scholarly article sharing would have For an interdisciplinary journal like mine article sharing would be positive Q Do you have other ideas about how the sharing of scholarly research should function within the research community Researchers are very protective of their results until they can be presented in appropriate forums and are accepted for publication Q It is our aim to continue to refine the thinking and approach to article sharing What feedback or guidance can you offer for further consideration or to help next steps It s all about timing Article sharing should occur early enough in the publication process but only after the paper has been accepted for publication Q Would your organization be willing to actively participate and contribute to this process Yes with the caveats stated above Q Do you support the initial outline Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks The devil will be in the details Looks confusing to me and it s not clear who makes the decisions on these things Terry Logan Editor in Chief Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology Medical Library Association The Medical Library Association Scholarly Communications Committee is pleased to have this opportunity to provide feedback on the STM Consultation on Article Sharing Information about the association and the work of the Scholarly Communications Committee can be found at https www mlanet org Q What impact do you think a unified approach to scholarly article sharing would have MLA would like to see a unified approach to scholarly article sharing include making the content of articles openly available and not just limited to scholarly research networks and broadened to allow for reuse of content in compliance with the copyright law Making articles more openly shared would benefit a number of stakeholders including Publishers it would increase the number of downloads and the sharing of articles would result in more exposure promotion for the journal Institutions it would facilitate collaboration among institutions and more widely promote the research being done at these institutions Researchers authors removing access barriers would enable authors to find that their work is more widely used which would translate into more downloads of their articles and citations this data could be used to strengthen the case for promotion and tenure Duplication of research also would be minimized and the discovery process would occur more rapidly which again would result in the information being used more widely and providing more publisher visibility Q Do you have other ideas about how the sharing of scholarly research should function within the research community MLA believes that more research outputs including articles and data will become openly available as a result of the Office of Science and Technology Policy s memorandum requiring federal agencies to ensure that the results of federally funded research are made publicly available In addition to federal agencies we also are finding that non government funding sources such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are participating in this exchange As an association of health information professionals MLA does not believe that information should be kept behind paywalls nor should it be confined to scholarly research collaboration networks The ultimate goal should be to make this information freely accessible worldwide to anyone who needs it Freely sharing this information and data will enable researchers to realize new discoveries more quickly accelerate the exchange of information among the research community and enhance the distribution of scientific and scholarly research Quality information for improved health MLA strongly recommends that the concept of a unified approach to scholarly article sharing be redefined to encompass open access as well as re use of articles and data Q It is our aim to continue to refine the thinking and approach to article sharing What feedback or guidance can you offer for further consideration or to help next steps Researchers are not just interested in sharing articles they are becoming increasingly interested in sharing data as well Research collaboration and the ability to exchange articles information data ideas etc freely and easily are important for the advancement of science Although addressing this need in the arena of scholarly research networks is important this information should be opened up beyond this group Allowing articles and supplementary material to be freely downloaded from the publisher s website or other central repository would serve this need Researchers could then simply link to the publishers websites when sharing information with one another Q Would your organization be willing to actively participate and contribute to this process Yes the Medical Library Association welcomes the opportunity to participate and contribute to this process Q Do you support the initial outline Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks MLA does not support the Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks as they are currently written We find the principles are vague and lack clarity For example does the concept of sharing imply read only and not allow for re use of the information How is the size of a typical research group of a particular discipline defined When the authors of the human genome group shared their articles more than 500 researchers participated MLA believes the draft principles need further discussion by all stakeholders and we will be interested in seeing the outcome of that discussion We appreciate having the opportunity to provide feedback and look forward to having the opportunity to engage in further discussion as you move forward Mendeley ZappyLabs Recognizing the role of third party platforms in scholarly communications To date there has been little engagement between the independent sites and services that scholars use on a daily basis to find share research and the publishers which source edit and produce high quality publications of the research Indeed only DeepDyve Digital Science and SSRN have so far responded to this consultation at the deadline In our view it s time to recognize our shared interests Therefore as a scholarly collaboration network Mendeley welcomes the STM Association s consultation on Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks and we offer our thoughts on the proposal below Q What impact do you think a unified approach to scholarly article sharing would have It s not entirely clear what is meant by unified so for the sake of discussion we ll assume that the proposal is for publishers who agree to the voluntary principles to have uniform guidance on how articles they publish should be shared and for platforms on which the sharing occurs to engage in reporting of the sharing in a uniform manner We would also like to note that the sharing mechanism which has the largest buy in from all parties involved is open access Open access allows any party to copy use distribute transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works in any digital medium for any responsible purpose subject to proper attribution of authorship This ideal solution would relieve the need to make the troublesome distinctions between private and public sharing commercial and non commercial use academic and industry use use of pre print vs final version and so on However we recognize the time isn t right for everyone to make the transition to full open access so we think this approach is a reasonable interim step toward facilitating scholarly sharing for restricted usage content Benefits of Uniformity of Publisher Guidance The main benefit of uniformity in publisher guidance would be depending on the details to facilitate innovation in scholarly communications by reducing the technical burden for sites to share research Currently there is a great diversity of sharing policies that range from no sharing at all to full BBB compliant open access depending on the publisher age or version of the document and type of site This complicated matrix of permissions designed to serve publisher needs is at odds with the need of sharing platforms to do the simplest thing that could possibly work An early stage company does not have the resources to make separate arrangements with hundreds of separate publishers and to develop code to identify and separately handle content from hundreds of different sources Therefore to realize the potential benefits of a uniform approach we would recommend that publishers implement full open access where possible and where that s not possible to provide simple and uniform guidance regarding sharing both with the author in mind and with third party platforms in mind Exceptions for different categories of sites or versions of documents should be minimized to reduce the identification and reporting burden A standard way of representing this guidance on the article page and in the metadata of the content itself for example as XMP fields in a PDF should be implemented Having this information easily available would make it easier for sharing platforms to follow publisher guidance which would be attractive because it would allow us to spend more time focusing on researcher needs and less time responding to takedown requests or being involved in other activities that aren t user focused Benefits of Uniformity of Reporting The main benefit of uniformity in reporting of sharing would be in increasing the utility of data from sharing platforms Data from a survey of academics by Scopus shows that awareness of altmetrics has been the fastest rising article impact in recent years and though overall awareness remains low we expect demand to continue to grow Mendeley and others have been engaged with the National Information Standards Organization over the past few years in developing best practices for reporting this sort of information and have contributed to a whitepaper which outlines the use cases and best practices One of the best practices identified is increasing the uniformity in reporting of the results An additional benefit in a uniform approach here would be to decrease technical burden in supplying usage reports The DOI Event Tracker project is an example of a useful and uniform approach Q Do you have other ideas about how the sharing of scholarly research should function within the research community The STM statement includes several specific guidelines on private sharing Specifically the guidelines state that private groups should be of the size that is typical for research groups of that discipline only share articles within and for the purposes of the group not be open to participation by the general public allow journal article sharing between subscribers and non subscribers within the group As this is essentially a statement of existing scholarly practice there s little to get excited or dismayed about but it is reassuring that signatories to the voluntary principles are officially declaring their support for the practice It does reduce some uncertainty among sharing platforms regarding which publishers are sharing friendly and provides much needed guidance to universities regarding existing scholarly sharing practices That said here are the main issues with the above proposal from a platform perspective The main concern from a sharing platform would be maintaining the privacy and security of user information Any reporting would need to be presented in aggregate anonymous fashion Identifying what is academic use and who is a member of the general public is problematic because many platforms do not authenticate users beyond name and email and thus will have to arrive at their own definitions to avoid improperly excluding small biotechs and patient advocates Any site which has access and entitlement barriers will drive users away to less restricted platforms which weakens the sites who are most willing to cooperate with publishers The call to integrate access and usage rights into research workflows must therefore be done carefully and in consultation with platforms in order to prevent creating a large technical burden that sharing platforms may not have the resources to implement Q It is our aim to continue to refine the thinking and approach to article sharing What feedback or guidance can you offer for further consideration or to help next steps We would encourage publishers to actively engage with sharing platforms in a continued discussion which recognizes that services which are finding adoption among academics aren t taking attention away from the publisher but rather finding new audiences for publications that publishers have previously been unable to reach They are reaching these new audiences by providing services such as author profiles article recommendations and discussion communities that naturally stretch across publishers but which do depend on the high quality content available through the efforts of publishers thus there is a clear mutual interest in working together Q Would your organization be willing to actively participate and contribute to this process Yes we would Q Do you support the initial outline Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks We thank the STM Association for getting the ball rolling on this and look forward to further productive discussions We are optimistic we can arrive at a solution which helps publishers reach new audiences and find new users for their content by supporting innovation in scholarly communications while addressing the issues raised above Nature Publishing Group Nature Publishing Group NPG submission to STM consultation on article sharing April 2015 Expressing Nature Publishing Group s support commitment to ongoing involvement Nature Publishing Group NPG welcomes STM s work in drafting these Voluntary principles for article sharing on scholarly collaboration networks We think consultation to seek feedback and input to refine them is an important step This is a complex issue which needs input from libraries researchers scholarly collaboration networks and publishers The voluntary principles provide a useful starting point to stimulate input and start a conversation NPG are committed to adapting to meet the needs of the community and to basing our decisions on an evidence based approach We hope that the STM consultation will stimulate an open minded collaborative conversation to make real progress in this important area As an active member of the group that drafted these principles Nature Publishing Group is happy to be listed as a supporter We welcome opportunities to actively participate as the process continues NPG s views on article sharing and the case for a unified approach NPG believe that enabling sharing of content is an important issue Scientists and researchers have always shared their work it is essential to advancing progress Nature was established in 1869 to help scientists share and to bring science to the public In today s global internet enabled world NPG think we can meet the needs of researchers and society better Striving to better meet these needs is the responsibility of publishers libraries scholarly collaboration networks and all those who work to support the research community We will collectively help research accelerate faster if we seek simple solutions which as far as possible apply across research communication These should streamline researchers workflows and be easy to understand and use This will require clear policies and practices from publishers SCNs and libraries Whatever solutions we jointly come up with should be roadtested with the academic community to ensure that they are fit for purpose Recommendations for next steps NPG wishes to enable researchers to share articles of interest with collaborators and colleagues Open access provides one route to removing barriers to sharing and Nature Publishing Group actively provides a growing number of open access options For subscription content there are a number of issues that we as a community must tackle On publisher platform sharing a case study from nature com is detailed below Private group sharing which the voluntary principles begin to address Public group sharing Public group sharing is the area we expect to be most complex We hope that broad agreement on private group sharing is achievable in the next draft of the principles For expediency we would recommend decoupling private group and public group sharing and addressing public group sharing separately in a future iteration of the principles Other issues that NPG see need consideration include sharing between academic and corporate researchers especially in tech transfer or highly collaborative environments We encourage COUNTER compliant solutions Article sharing on nature com In December 2014 as a first step we introduced a one year pilot to support reasonable sharing of subscription journal content on nature com for personal and non commercial purposes Our goal is to support article sharing in ways that Meet the needs of today s researchers and the tools they use to collaborate and manage references Enable researchers with institutional or personal subscriptions to our content to share and discuss articles Enable read only quick view access to aid collaboration Are easy and seamless for the user Work with library systems and standards such as COUNTER in measuring downloads to provide return on investment ROI information to subscription purchasers and administrators Provide cross industry solutions that work for all publishers libraries and reference management scientific social networks Respect intellectual property rights Subscribers to 49 journals on nature com can share a unique URL to a full text read only version of published scientific research with colleagues or collaborators in the most convenient way for them e g via email and social media Over 100 media outlets and blogs across the globe that report on the findings of articles published on nature com can provide their own readers with a link to a full text read only view of the original scientific paper Early results of this pilot show that there has been little to no abuse and we will be presenting a fuller set of results in the coming weeks More information including a draft set of principles and guidelines is available here www nature com npg company info content sharing html Oxford University Press OUP broadly supports the aims behind the draft voluntary principles and would certainly be in favour of developing guidelines to clarify the ways in which authors can collaboratively share their work within academic groups We would also support processes to provide additional details on the nature and the frequency of sharing using standards such as COUNTER However we do have some concerns over the submission terms and conditions that some SCNs use and the sorts of rights they require authors members to grant to them often in direct contradiction of their existing publishing agreements If possible we would hope that this could also be addressed In terms of further initiatives as Rogier van Erkel suggests in his submission we would also be interested to further investigate the possibility of licensing other SCN activity via RROs such as the CCC and PLS if an appropriate method of licensing can be found In summary we would support the aims of the initial outline set out here and we would be willing to participate and contribute to this process T Scott Plutchak The notion of a unified approach to scholarly article sharing is very welcome In the current environment people are generally uncertain about what is acceptable use within SCNs which leads to occasional violations of copyright and I suspect to people not engaging in useful sharing of articles in cases that would generally be considered appropriate With the increasing use of SCNs setting up clear and generally agreed upon guidelines would be very beneficial The very nature of SCNs insures that people from different institutions working collaboratively are going to have unequal access to non OA journal articles A consensus view of what is considered to be acceptable for sharing such articles would streamline things considerably It would save individual SCNs from developing independent guidance for what is appropriate within their systems eliminate the need for participating publishers to develop individual and probably conflicting policies and clarify for researchers the norms governing the sharing of non OA articles within SCNs As I understand it the general principles outlined come down to the fol wing people should not post non OA articles to SCNs for anyone to download although they are encouraged to post the metadata for those articles Presumably they could post any articles for which they hold the co right some non OA journals operate this way Copies of OA articles should be uploaded Non OA articles can be shared freely among the members of individual academic groups as defined in the draft However it is not clear to me that these academic groups are something that is already clearly identified and understood throughout the research community A great deal of collaboration it seems to me is less formal and more ad hoc It will be necessary to probe this notion of academic groups more thoroughly to be sure that it is loose enough to reflect the ways in which people are actually using SCNs to work together Without more investigation into how collaborative groups actually come together within SCNs I can t tell if the definition given in the draft principles is something that users of the SCNs would recognize If not then the principles risk generating more confusion rather than shedding light I m intrigued by the notion of developing COUNTER like metrics for tracking how much use of articles takes place This would clearly be extremely useful in determining how well the SCNs facilitate article sharing as well as identifying the degree to which non OA articles are shared More data on this would be helpful in further refining the principles down the road I m not enough of a technologist to have any idea how complicated or difficult it would be to develop the tools to collect this data so I don t know how practical the suggestion is But then I ve no idea how DOIs actually wor either I m just grateful that they do Thank goodness for the nerds of the scholarly communication world The major flaw that I see in the development of these principles so far is that it does not appear that the SCNs have been actively engaged to the degree that they

    Original URL path: http://www.stm-assoc.org/stm-consultations/scn-consultation-2015/submissions/ (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • International Association of STM Publishers
    Crotty Ph D Senior Editor Oxford University Press Open Science Bridging the gap between society researcher Emilio Bruna Editor in Chief Biotropica 2 10 Professional Development of Journals Operations Moderator Kate Pearson Business Development Manager Bioscientifica Ltd How can we improve our journal operations What factors need to be considered and what outcomes can we hope to achieve The speakers in this session will share their experiences of developing publishing strategies of optimising both peer review and production processes and of societies going out to tender to choose the most suitable publisher for them and their publications Developing a Publishing Strategy Aaron B Johnson Cambridge University Press Outsourcing Peer Review and Editorial Management Jessica Rucker American Chemical Society ACS Optimizing Production Lisa McLaughlin American Institute of Physics AIPP Going to Tender Choosing your Publisher Kathey Alexander Consultant in Professional and Scholarly Publishing 3 25 Meeting wrap up close Darrell W Gunter STM Association 3 30 Refreshment Break Networking U S Conference Disruption to Eruption Accelerating the Advance of Scholarly Communications Driven by technology public policy internationalization changing business models industry communication challenges and generational imperatives profound changes are taking place in the scholarly publishing community The STM annual U S conference brings together major stakeholders in our changing environment The conference facilitates participants to listen learn discuss and network Tuesday April 21 4 00 Registration 4 30 Opening Darrell W Gunter Director North America Membership STM Association Welcome Jayne Marks Vice President Publishing LWW Journals at Wolters Kluwer Health Chair of the Board STM Association STM U S Conference Opening Keynote Scholarly Publishing The View from 5280 Feet Jeffrey Beall Associate Professor Scholarly Communications Librarian University of Colorado Denver Most of the public information about scholarly open access publishing comes from open access advocates themselves and the information they supply is often incomplete and unbalanced This presentation will fill this gap and provide a more complete view of open access covering topics such as predatory publishers and related scams the decline of academic librarianship and the breakdown of research cultures Predatory publishers are a growing threat to the integrity of the scholarly communication ecosystem 5 30 Analysis Insights and Trends in the Global STM Market Deni Auclair Vice President Lead Analyst STM Outsell Inc Auclair will review some of the key qualitative and quantitative trends affecting the scientific technical medical and scholarly publishing industry Will include Ten to Watch Essential Actions and new findings on Open Access 6 00 7 00 Opening Reception for U S Conference Society seminar attendees Grand Hyatt Washington Wednesday April 22 8 00 Light continental breakfast networking 9 00 Opening Eefke Smit Director Standards and Technology STM Association Welcome Jayne Marks Vice President Publishing LWW Journals at Wolters Kluwer Health Chair of the Board STM Association Keynote Hot off the press STM Report 4th Edition Michael Mabe provides the key insights and developments contained in the 4th Edition STM Report Michael Mabe Chief Executive Officer STM Association 9 30 Science Focused Start ups Moderator Michael

    Original URL path: http://www.stm-assoc.org/events/stm-annual-us-conference-2015/ (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • International Association of STM Publishers
    s largest collections of biomedical and health literature It provides not for profit research institutions medical nursing dentistry and pharmacy schools government health and economics ministries with free or very low cost online access to research journals databases and other online resources The HINARI program was launched in 2002 by six STM member companies Blackwell Elsevier Science Harcourt International STM Group Springer Verlag John Wiley and Wolters Kluwer International Health and Science in partnership with the World Health Organization Since then the programme has been joined by more than 150 publishers Publisher Partners Adis a Wolters Kluwer business Akadémiai Kiadó American Academy of Family Physicans American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons American Academy of Pediatrics AAP American Association for Cancer Research The AACR American Association for Clinical Chemistry American Association for the Advancement of Science AAAS American College of Chest Physicians American College of Physicians American Dental Association American Dental Education Association American Diabetes Association American Heart Association American Medical Association American Physiological Society American Psychiatric Publishing Inc American Psychological Association American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology ASBMB American Society for Clinical Pathology ASCP American Society for Nutrition American Society of Animal Science ASAS American Society of Clinical Oncology ASCO American Society of Hematology American Society of Nephrology American Society of Neuroradiology American Society of Plant Biologists American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene American Speech Language Hearing Association Annual Reviews ARKAT USA Inc Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers Australasian Medical Publishing Company Australian Academic Press Australian Physiotherapy Association Australian Society of Anaesthetists Berkeley Electronic Press Bioline International BioMed Central BioOne BioScientifica BMJ Group Botanical Society of America Brill British Editorial Society of Bone Joint Surgery British Institute of Radiology British Library for Development Studies BLDS CABI International Cambridge University Press Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists Canadian Medical Association Journal Canadian Psychological Association Co Action Publishing Cochrane Collaboration The Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press College of Occupational Therapists Company of Biologists The Conference Archives Inc Core Medical Publishing Croatian Cardiac Society CSIRO PUBLISHING Dansk Psykologisk Forlag De Gruyter Deutscher Ärzte Verlag Dove Medical Press Duodecim EBM Guidelines Finland EBSCO Publishing Elfos Scientiae Elsevier Science Environmental Information Coalition EIC European Association of Science Editors European Respiratory Society F1000 Research Ltd Facultad de Medicina Universidad Autónoma de Bucaramanga Faculty of 1000 Limited Faculty of General Dental Practice UK Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital Mahidol University Finnish Institute of Occupational Health Finland Freie Universität Berlin International Academy Institut für Qualitative Forschung Future Science Group Guilford Publications Inc Guttmacher Institute Health Affairs Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hogrefe Publishing Group ICDDR B International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research Bangladesh IFIS Publishing Informa Healthcare International Medical Press IOS Press IWA Publishing John Libbey Eurotext John Wiley Sons Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University Press Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Inc Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group Journal of Wound Care MA Healthcare Ltd JoVE Lancet The Landes Bioscience LexisNexis Libertas Academica Lifescience Global Lippincott Williams Wilkins Longwoods Publishing Makerere University Medical

    Original URL path: http://www.stm-assoc.org/research4life-outreach/research4life-programmes/hinari/ (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive



  •