https://www.idw-online.de/pages/de/news405163

Der Centaurus Verlag [...] verzichtet in seinem Verlagsvertrag ausdrücklich auf die Einräumung ausschließlicher Nutzungsrechte und erlaubt sowohl die Selbstarchivierung als auch eine generelle Verfügbarmachung auf Volltextservern. Davon profitieren die Wissenschaftler und der Verlag, denn dadurch wird nicht nur ein freier Wissensfluss gewährleistet, sondern auch der Bekanntheitsgrad der Autoren erhöht.
Nach den guten Erfahrungen im Bereich Bildungsforschung mit dem Volltextserver pedocs (https://www.pedocs.de) wird der Centaurus Verlag den Open Access Gedanken auch im Bereich der Sozialwissenschaften fortführen. Ausgewählte Volltexte aus dem Soziologie-Verlagsprogramm werden über das Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR) (www.ssoar.info) nach dem Open-Access-Prinzip bereitgestellt.

https://www.ctt-journal.com/2-6-en-gratwohl-2011jan14.html

In CTT, via
https://www.connotea.org/article/cf301e4b191273cecf3e42ba5babd32b

HINARI had a role, and was visionary, in the days before open access (by which I mean true open access with immediate access, reuse rights and secure archiving) existed. Now, however publishers are cynically hiding behind it, shirking their responsibility to disseminate medical information, and, making decisions on access at will and according to their commercial needs. Open access is the only long-term, viable, ethical way of disseminating medical information and it’s time publishers accepted it as their duty to find ways to make this happen.

https://blogs.plos.org/speakingofmedicine/2011/01/14/what-next-for-hinari-in-an-open-access-world/ kommentiert die Entscheidung führerender Verlage, Zeitschriften aus dem HINARI-Paket für Bangladesh zu nehmen.

https://archiv.twoday.net/stories/11573652/
https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d196.full Volltext inzwischen einsehbar

https://www.infotoday.com/IT/jan11/Interview-with-Derk-Haank.shtml

Zusammenfassung von Richard Poynder:
https://poynder.blogspot.com/2011/01/interview-with-springers-derk-haank.html

Open Access ist für Springer eine Nischenaktivität. Die Firma glaubt an das Weiterbestehen der bisherigen Verhältnisse und holt das Geld der OA-Befürworter da ab, wo sie nun einmal stehen. Springer Open ist für Fachgebiete außerhalb des biomedizinischen Bereichs da. Solange grüner OA die Geschäfte nicht beeinträchtigt, ist es OK, aber Springer ist gegen Mandate.

Update: Genauso sieht das Barbara Fister
https://goo.gl/Jv3vY
"He say, "there is a real danger of destroying the equilibrium that we have achieved over OA." The equilibrium he's talking about is continuing to reap most of their profits from library subscriptions, adding a new revenue trickle as a tiny minority of scientists purchase freedom for their ideas, and a smidgen of green OA, provided it remains largely ineffective...."

Wie Creative Commons-Lizenzen im Bereich des Designs physischer Objekte verwandt werden, zeigt

https://www.netzpolitik.org/2011/einfuhrung-in-open-design

https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Freier-Zugang-zu-wissenschaftlichen-Veroeffentlichungen-gefordert-1168057.html

"In einer wissensbasierten Ökonomie sollte das Wissen frei fließen." Dieses klare Bekenntnis legte der Präsident der Niederländischen Wissenschaftsorganisation (NWO), Professor Jos Engelen, in seiner Keynote auf der Konferenz Academic Publishing in Europe (APE 2011) ab, die derzeit in der Berliner Akadamie der Wissenschaften stattfindet. "Früher oder später", ist Engelen überzeugt, werde der freie Zugang zu den Ergebnissen der öffentlich geförderten wissenschaftlichen Forschung "der Normalfall und nicht die Ausnahme" sein.

Five publishers have withdrawn free access to more than 2500 health and biomedical online journals from institutions in Bangladesh. One research leader has described the situation as “very discouraging.”

From 4 January Elsevier Journals withdrew access in Bangladesh to 1610 of its publications, including the Lancet stable of journals, which had been available through the World Health Organization’s Health Inter-Network for Access to Research Initiative (HINARI) programme.

https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d196.short

Update: https://archiv.twoday.net/stories/11577886/

https://archiv.twoday.net/stories/11584167/

https://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2011/01/08/launch-of-%E2%80%9Cprinciples-on-open-bibliographic-data%E2%80%9D-at-pmr-symposium/

Principles on Open Bibliographic Data



Producers of bibliographic data such as libraries, publishers, universities, scholars or social reference management communities have an important role in supporting the advance of humanity’s knowledge. For society to reap the full benefits from bibliographic endeavours, it is imperative that bibliographic data be made open — that is available for anyone to use and re-use freely for any purpose.

Bibliographic Data



To define the scope of the principles, in this first part the underlying concept of bibliographic data is explained.

Core Data



Bibliographic data consists of bibliographic descriptions. A bibliographic description describes a bibliographic resource (article, monograph etc. – whether print or electronic) with the purpose of:

identifying the described resource, i.e. pointing to a unique resource in the universe of all bibliographic resources and
locating the described resource, i.e. indicating how/where to find the described resource.
Traditionally one description served both purposes at once by delivering information about:

author(s) and editor(s), titles, publisher, publication date and place, identification of parent work (e.g. a journal), page information.



In the web environment identification makes use of Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) like a URN, DOI etc. Locating an item is made possible through HTTP-URIs known as Uniform Resource Locators (URLs). All URIs for bibliographic resources thus fall under this narrow concept of bibliographic data.

Secondary Data



A bibliographic description may include other information that falls under the concept of bibliographic data, such as non-web identifiers (ISBN, LCCN, OCLC etc), rights assertions, administrative data and more*; this data may be produced by libraries, publishers, scholars, online communities of book lovers, social reference management systems, and so on.

Furthermore, libraries and related institutions produce controlled vocabularies for the purpose of bibliographic description, such as name and subject authority files, classifications etc., which also fall under the concept of bibliographic data.

[See addendum for a list of secondary bibliographic data.]

Four Principles



Formally, we recommend adopting and acting on the following principles:

1. Where bibliographic data or collections of bibliographic data are published it is critical that they be published with a clear and explicit statement of the wishes and expectations of the publishers with respect to re-use and re-purposing of individual bibliographic descriptions, the whole data collection, and subsets of the collection. This statement should be precise, irrevocable, and based on an appropriate and recognized legal statement in the form of a waiver or license.

When publishing data make an explicit and robust license statement.

2. Many widely recognized licenses are not intended for, and are not appropriate for, bibliographic data or collections of bibliographic data. A variety of waivers and licenses that are designed for and appropriate for the treatment of data are described at https://www.opendefinition.org/licenses/#Data.

Creative Commons licenses (apart from CC0), GFDL, GPL, BSD, etc. are NOT appropriate for data and their use is STRONGLY discouraged.

Use a recognized waiver or license that is appropriate for data.

3. The use of licenses which limit commercial re-use or limit the production of derivative works by excluding use for particular purposes or by specific persons or organizations is STRONGLY discouraged. These licenses make it impossible to effectively integrate and re-purpose datasets.

They furthermore prevent commercial services which add value to bibliographic data or commercial activities which could be used to support data preservation.

If you want your data to be effectively used and added to by others it should be open as defined by the Open Definition (https://opendefinition.org/) – in particular non-commercial and other restrictive clauses should not be used.

4. Furthermore, it is STRONGLY recommended that bibliographic data or collections of bibliographic data, especially where publicly funded, be explicitly placed in the public domain via the use of the Public Domain Dedication and Licence or Creative Commons Zero Waiver. This ethos of sharing and re-use should fit well within the remit of publicly funded cultural heritage institutions.

We strongly recommend explicitly placing bibliographic data in the Public Domain via PDDL or CC0.

Addendum

A non-comprehensive list of bibliographic data.



Core data: names and identifiers of author(s) and editor(s), titles, publisher information, publication date and place, identification of parent work (e.g. a journal), page information, URIs.

Secondary data: format of work, non-web identifiers (ISBN, LCCN, OCLC number etc.), an indication of rights associated with a work, information on sponsorship (e.g. funding), information about carrier type, extent and size information, administrative data (last modified etc.), relevant links (to Wikipedia, Google books, Amazon etc.), table of contents, links to digitized parts of a work (tables of content, registers, bibliographies etc.), addresses and other contact details about the author(s), cover images, abstracts, reviews, summaries, subject headings, assigned keywords, classification notation, user-generated tags, exemplar data (number of holdings, call number), …

Contributors: Karen Coyle, Mark MacGillivray, Peter Murray-Rust, Ben O’ Steen, Jim Pitman, Adrian Pohl, Rufus Pollock

https://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/2011/01/plos-one-now-worlds-largest-journal.html

Alles spricht dafür, dass das Flaggschiff des Open-Access-Verlags Public Library of Science, PLoS One mit 6749 Artikeln das größte wissenschaftliche Journal ist.

https://www.plosone.org

Update:

In a press release earlier today, the Nature Publishing Group announced a new journal that is covering biology, chemistry, earth sciences and physics,
is an open access journal, giving the authors the choice of two Creative Commons non-commercial licenses,
will publish all papers that are judged to be technically valid and original, and
uses article-level metrics to put the emphasis on the individual article rather than the journal as a whole.
The new journal is called Scientific Reports, and obviously resembles PLoS ONE in many ways, down to the article-processing charges which are $1350 for both journals (but will go up to $1700 for Scientific Reports in 2012). The journal is open for submissions and will publish the first papers this summer.
https://blogs.plos.org/mfenner/2011/01/06/new-journal-nature-one-launched-today/



Update:
https://blogs.law.harvard.edu/pamphlet/2011/01/15/a-ray-of-sunshine-in-the-open-access-future/

https://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/786-guid.html

Der weltgrößte Wissenschaftsverlag gibt die Erlaubnis, eigene Postprints (Versionen, die die Änderungen des Peer Review berücksichtigen) einzustellen nicht mehr, wenn Repositorien mit einem Mandat betroffen sind. Kein Wunder, dass Mandat-Onkel Harnad schäumt.

Ich mag auch keine Mandate, da diese nach deutschen Recht als nicht vereinbar mit der Wissenschaftsfreiheit angesehen werden (eine Ansicht, die ich nicht teile) und da der empirische Nachweis, dass bessere Einstellungsraten kausal auf die Mandate und nicht auf die flankierenden Maßnahmen zurückgehen, bislang aussteht.