Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
FYI.....via Slashdot.... Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu December 6, 2013 Lots of researchers post PDFs of their own papers on their own web-sites. It’s always been so, because even though technically it’s in breach of the copyright transfer agreements that we blithely sign, everyone knows it’s right and proper. Preventing people from making their own work available would be insane, and the publisher that did it would be committing a PR gaffe of huge proportions. Enter Elsevier, stage left. Bioinformatician Guy Leonard is just one of several people to have mentioned on Twitter this morning that Academia.edu took down their papers in response to a notice from Elsevier. Here’s a screengrab of the notification: < - > http://svpow.com/2013/12/06/elsevier-is-taking-down-papers-from-academia-edu... --- Just because i'm near the punchbowl doesn't mean I'm also drinking from it.
"It’s always been so, because even though technically it’s in breach of the copyright transfer agreements that we blithely sign, everyone knows it’s right and proper. Preventing people from making their own work available would be insane..." Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. -- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org On Dec 6, 2013, at 3:57 PM, Richard Forno <rforno@infowarrior.org> wrote:
FYI.....via Slashdot....
Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
December 6, 2013
Lots of researchers post PDFs of their own papers on their own web-sites. It’s always been so, because even though technically it’s in breach of the copyright transfer agreements that we blithely sign, everyone knows it’s right and proper. Preventing people from making their own work available would be insane, and the publisher that did it would be committing a PR gaffe of huge proportions.
Enter Elsevier, stage left. Bioinformatician Guy Leonard is just one of several people to have mentioned on Twitter this morning that Academia.edu took down their papers in response to a notice from Elsevier. Here’s a screengrab of the notification:
< - >
http://svpow.com/2013/12/06/elsevier-is-taking-down-papers-from-academia-edu...
--- Just because i'm near the punchbowl doesn't mean I'm also drinking from it.
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements.
Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
Precisely. -- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements.
Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG -- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org www.spatiallyinclined.org @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking> On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements.
Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again. - Rob Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014 On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote:
To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org www.spatiallyinclined.org @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
They still might. It often takes publishers a bit of time to address infringement. On balance, greater availability leads to higher rates of citation which, in turn, leads to a more valuable journal for the publisher. --John John G. McNutt,MSW, PhD, Professor University of Delaware 298 Graham Hall Newark, DE 19716 Voice: 302.831.0765 Fax 302.831.4425 mcnuttjg@udel.edu UD Experts http://udapps.nss.udel.edu/experts/17480775379-John_G_McNutt Be ashamed to die until you've won some victory for humanity-Horace Mann Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pitiful that it has to be us. Jerry Garcia **************************************************************************** *********** -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Robert W. Gehl Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 12:08 PM To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again. - Rob Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014 On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote:
To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org www.spatiallyinclined.org @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ ____________________________________________________________ 5 Ways to LOWER blood sugar 1 EASY tip to increase fat-burning, lower blood sugar & decrease fat storage http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3265/52a3591665aba59156c02mp03duc
Not only is Robert correct that Academia.edu is a "social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations" but it is also a company with multimillion dollar funding. I am a proponent of open access but I can't feel bad for Academia in this case. I think they get a lot more slack because they are able to use a .edu extension than they would if they were Academia.com. Edward On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Robert W. Gehl <lists@robertwgehl.org>wrote:
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote:
To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org www.spatiallyinclined.org @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
"I think they get a lot more slack because they are able to use a .edu extension than they would if they were Academia.com." Agreed. It's one of those accidents of Internet history that they got that TLD, and it's paid dividends. Open access is one thing when it's controlled by individual researchers or done in collaboration with publishers. It's another when it's the foundation of a site that's vacuuming a lot of free labor and illbegotten materials. Not that I have a lot of sympathy for Elsevier, either. - Rob Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014 On 12/07/2013 12:18 PM, Edward M. Corrado wrote:
Not only is Robert correct that Academia.edu is a "social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations" but it is also a company with multimillion dollar funding. I am a proponent of open access but I can't feel bad for Academia in this case. I think they get a lot more slack because they are able to use a .edu extension than they would if they were Academia.com.
Edward
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Robert W. Gehl <lists@robertwgehl.org>wrote:
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote:
To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org www.spatiallyinclined.org @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_ -------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again. - Rob Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014 On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote:
To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Exactly. Which is why I hope some universities and associations simply take back publishing from the Elseviers and Taylor and Francises of the world, do it online, and make it open access. We can keep doing the free labor of writing, reviewing and even editing. - Rob Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014 On 12/07/2013 12:46 PM, Gil De Zuniga, Homero wrote:
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ
Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_
-------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote:
To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Dear Air-ls, I just don't understand how people who are able to receive the Wolf prize, the Fields medal or even the Nobel can't find yet a simple way to publish academic papers without elesevier and others "papers databases"... I'm probably missing something. Yohanan *יוחנן ועקנין* Yohanan Ouaknine <http://www.ois.co.il/> <http://maps.google.com/maps?q=&hl=en> yohanan.ouaknine@ois.co.il *Blog: www.ois.co.il <http://www.ois.co.il/>* *Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/yohananouaknine <http://www.linkedin.com/in/yohananouaknine>* Twitter: www.twitter.com/yohananouaknine On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Robert W. Gehl <lists@robertwgehl.org>wrote:
Exactly. Which is why I hope some universities and associations simply take back publishing from the Elseviers and Taylor and Francises of the world, do it online, and make it open access. We can keep doing the free labor of writing, reviewing and even editing.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 12:46 PM, Gil De Zuniga, Homero wrote:
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ
Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_
-------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote:
To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote:
Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
It seems like double billing. Your U paid you to do the research. Your U pays the publisher to allow access for those at your U to that research. That is simplified, but not inaccurate. Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 7, 2013, at 2:46 PM, "Gil De Zuniga, Homero" <hgz@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ
Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_
-------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote: To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote: Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
I agree but there is a lot of expensive stuff here. Even if you take the physical distribution out of the mix, publishers do a lot of things to get it out the door, keep it indexed and marketed and so forth. Some associations (many of which are small) use publishers to meet a lot of their back office needs as well. -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Nathaniel Poor Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 4:59 PM To: Gil De Zuniga, Homero Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu It seems like double billing. Your U paid you to do the research. Your U pays the publisher to allow access for those at your U to that research. That is simplified, but not inaccurate. Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 7, 2013, at 2:46 PM, "Gil De Zuniga, Homero" <hgz@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ
Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_
-------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote: To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote: Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ ____________________________________________________________ Gaviscon® Official Site Gaviscon® Relieves Heartburn Fast! See Products, Heartburn Info & More http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3265/52a39dc27d2081dc20df6mp05duc
John, they do a great deal of work to make publications occur. I grant you that, but they are not paying for the vast majority of labor they rely upon. If I review a paper, it is 3-4 hours of reading, checking ideas, etc. If we assume we all only receive papers that are in the center of our active research programs, narrow that down to 1-2 hours for a thoughtful, useful review. Even that low number yields some potentially expensive reviews for many comm/ICT journals that publish 80-100 articles annually if publishers were paying for the actually work product. I for one would like to have 1/2 my hourly consulting rate for the reviews I did last year. Homero probably would as well. Darren -------------------------------------------------------- Darren Purcell Associate Professor and Undergraduate Adviser Dept. of Geography and Environmental Sustainability University of Oklahoma Email: dpurcell@ou.edu Skype: profpurcell (405) 325-9193 http://ou.academia.edu/DarrenPurcell On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 5:02 PM, John McNutt <mcnuttjg@netzero.com> wrote:
I agree but there is a lot of expensive stuff here. Even if you take the physical distribution out of the mix, publishers do a lot of things to get it out the door, keep it indexed and marketed and so forth. Some associations (many of which are small) use publishers to meet a lot of their back office needs as well.
-----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Nathaniel Poor Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 4:59 PM To: Gil De Zuniga, Homero Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
It seems like double billing.
Your U paid you to do the research. Your U pays the publisher to allow access for those at your U to that research.
That is simplified, but not inaccurate.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 7, 2013, at 2:46 PM, "Gil De Zuniga, Homero" < hgz@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ
Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_
-------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote: To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote: Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ ____________________________________________________________ Gaviscon® Official Site Gaviscon® Relieves Heartburn Fast! See Products, Heartburn Info & More http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3265/52a39dc27d2081dc20df6mp05duc
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
John, Darren, Nat, and all ~ Sure, it askhas a cost, I get it.... I'm convinced their margin is better than any other industry though. But in any case, what about at least a more egalitarian distribution of the profits. If not to us, which I get it, may be selfish as universities pay us (still debatable tough), to the schools. What about routing back some funds to universities for grants to improve the very product they sell? = better research. HGZ Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_ -------- Original message -------- From: Darren Purcell Date:12/07/2013 17:17 (GMT-06:00) To: John McNutt Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu John, they do a great deal of work to make publications occur. I grant you that, but they are not paying for the vast majority of labor they rely upon. If I review a paper, it is 3-4 hours of reading, checking ideas, etc. If we assume we all only receive papers that are in the center of our active research programs, narrow that down to 1-2 hours for a thoughtful, useful review. Even that low number yields some potentially expensive reviews for many comm/ICT journals that publish 80-100 articles annually if publishers were paying for the actually work product. I for one would like to have 1/2 my hourly consulting rate for the reviews I did last year. Homero probably would as well. Darren -------------------------------------------------------- Darren Purcell Associate Professor and Undergraduate Adviser Dept. of Geography and Environmental Sustainability University of Oklahoma Email: dpurcell@ou.edu Skype: profpurcell (405) 325-9193 http://ou.academia.edu/DarrenPurcell On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 5:02 PM, John McNutt <mcnuttjg@netzero.com> wrote:
I agree but there is a lot of expensive stuff here. Even if you take the physical distribution out of the mix, publishers do a lot of things to get it out the door, keep it indexed and marketed and so forth. Some associations (many of which are small) use publishers to meet a lot of their back office needs as well.
-----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Nathaniel Poor Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 4:59 PM To: Gil De Zuniga, Homero Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
It seems like double billing.
Your U paid you to do the research. Your U pays the publisher to allow access for those at your U to that research.
That is simplified, but not inaccurate.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 7, 2013, at 2:46 PM, "Gil De Zuniga, Homero" < hgz@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ
Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com<http://www.homerogdz.com> Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_
-------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote: To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org>> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote: Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ ____________________________________________________________ Gaviscon® Official Site Gaviscon® Relieves Heartburn Fast! See Products, Heartburn Info & More http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3265/52a39dc27d2081dc20df6mp05duc
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
DarrenI dont disagree at all. I think my point (perhaps badly made) is that most scholarly associations and many universities might not be able or willing to do that. John From: profpurcell@gmail.com [mailto:profpurcell@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Darren Purcell Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 6:17 PM To: John McNutt Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu John, they do a great deal of work to make publications occur. I grant you that, but they are not paying for the vast majority of labor they rely upon. If I review a paper, it is 3-4 hours of reading, checking ideas, etc. If we assume we all only receive papers that are in the center of our active research programs, narrow that down to 1-2 hours for a thoughtful, useful review. Even that low number yields some potentially expensive reviews for many comm/ICT journals that publish 80-100 articles annually if publishers were paying for the actually work product. I for one would like to have 1/2 my hourly consulting rate for the reviews I did last year. Homero probably would as well. Darren -------------------------------------------------------- Darren Purcell Associate Professor and Undergraduate Adviser Dept. of Geography and Environmental Sustainability University of Oklahoma Email: dpurcell@ou.edu Skype: profpurcell (405) 325-9193 http://ou.academia.edu/DarrenPurcell On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 5:02 PM, John McNutt <mcnuttjg@netzero.com> wrote: I agree but there is a lot of expensive stuff here. Even if you take the physical distribution out of the mix, publishers do a lot of things to get it out the door, keep it indexed and marketed and so forth. Some associations (many of which are small) use publishers to meet a lot of their back office needs as well. -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Nathaniel Poor Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 4:59 PM To: Gil De Zuniga, Homero Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu It seems like double billing. Your U paid you to do the research. Your U pays the publisher to allow access for those at your U to that research. That is simplified, but not inaccurate. Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 7, 2013, at 2:46 PM, "Gil De Zuniga, Homero" <hgz@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ
Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 <tel:%28512%29%20471%206323> Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_
-------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote: To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote: Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ ____________________________________________________________ Gaviscon® Official Site Gaviscon® Relieves Heartburn Fast! See Products, Heartburn Info & More http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3265/52a39dc27d2081dc20df6mp05duc _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ ____________________________________________________________ <http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGLI3256/?u=http://newsletter.adsonar.c om/nwrss/imgs/nwr_1560786_36140222_379054_2070767_4_2.PNG?placementId=156078 6&plid=379054&pid=2070767&ps=36140222&rotation=4&type=2&zw=500&zh=70&v=5&url =NA&uid=>
I'd ask why do we need publishers like Elsevier? Our Universities pay for or research, and we give them to Elsevier (or other similar groups) to publish and they make a profit of it, but we canot even use and share our own work? That's simply a stupid way of doing things. best, Raphael Tsavkko Garcia PhD candidate, Universidad de Deusto Em 08/12/2013 00:02, John McNutt escreveu:
I agree but there is a lot of expensive stuff here. Even if you take the physical distribution out of the mix, publishers do a lot of things to get it out the door, keep it indexed and marketed and so forth. Some associations (many of which are small) use publishers to meet a lot of their back office needs as well.
-----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Nathaniel Poor Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 4:59 PM To: Gil De Zuniga, Homero Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
It seems like double billing.
Your U paid you to do the research. Your U pays the publisher to allow access for those at your U to that research.
That is simplified, but not inaccurate.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 7, 2013, at 2:46 PM, "Gil De Zuniga, Homero" <hgz@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ
Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_
-------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote: To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote: Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ ____________________________________________________________ Gaviscon® Official Site Gaviscon® Relieves Heartburn Fast! See Products, Heartburn Info & More http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3265/52a39dc27d2081dc20df6mp05duc
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Hi all This is a recurring discussion I think.... I would suggest approaching it from the angle of recruitment committees: until they (we) cease considering well-established, commercial journals as more prestigious there will be no incentive for people to stop publishing there, which increases their rejetion rates, and make them even more attractive. Since true open access journals are still young they have not had a chance to acquire this aura yet. Hopefully with time open access journals will develop their layout and copy-editing competencies to match commercial presses (and not just on the back of PhD students either). As for reviewing, it can be considered in connection to the above - why refuse to review for journals which you would happily publish with because they are prestigious? - or separately, as labour which deservses to be be compensated and in fact publishers offer incentives to reviewers in the form of reduced book prices etc. But if you want real wages that is something else which only organised collective action will produce probably; but it does solve the issue that the work of reviewing is only recognised indirectly - open publications of reviews as some do would help blah blah etc cheers Mathieu ________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Raphael Garcia [tsavkko@yahoo.com.br] Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2013 12:33 To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu I'd ask why do we need publishers like Elsevier? Our Universities pay for or research, and we give them to Elsevier (or other similar groups) to publish and they make a profit of it, but we canot even use and share our own work? That's simply a stupid way of doing things. best, Raphael Tsavkko Garcia PhD candidate, Universidad de Deusto Em 08/12/2013 00:02, John McNutt escreveu:
I agree but there is a lot of expensive stuff here. Even if you take the physical distribution out of the mix, publishers do a lot of things to get it out the door, keep it indexed and marketed and so forth. Some associations (many of which are small) use publishers to meet a lot of their back office needs as well.
-----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Nathaniel Poor Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 4:59 PM To: Gil De Zuniga, Homero Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
It seems like double billing.
Your U paid you to do the research. Your U pays the publisher to allow access for those at your U to that research.
That is simplified, but not inaccurate.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 7, 2013, at 2:46 PM, "Gil De Zuniga, Homero" <hgz@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:
I know this might sound a bit odd, and I admit it beforehand : -} But it sends to me that "us" researchers are the ones who are really losing in this trend, beyond the discussion of open research. 1. We do the research 2. We review the research 3. The research gets published by Elsevier and other publishers, or Academia.edu 4. We make no money. 5. They do. I agree the system should be open. But if it's not, why shouldn't be the case that at least a decent part of the financial benefits revert back to the authors, departments, research units, schools, etc... Saludos, HGZ
Homero Gil de Zúñiga Associate Professor Director, Digital Media Research Program (DMRP) communication.utexas.edu/strauss/dmrp Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life College of Communication University of Texas - Austin utexas.edu Voice (512) 471 6323 Fax (512) 471 7979 www.homerogdz.com Google Scholar Profile @_HGZ_
-------- Original message -------- From: "Robert W. Gehl" Date:12/07/2013 11:08 (GMT-06:00) To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu
Setting aside individual publishers' rules about posting pre-prints to a /personal/ site, I've wondered for some time why publishers have not yet gone after Academia.edu, which is not a personal site, but a centralized social network built in part on top of a lot of copyright violations. It's YouTube all over again.
- Rob
Robert W. Gehl Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Affiliated Faculty, University Writing Program The University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org<http://www.robertwgehl.org> | @robertwgehl Sent from our OS on our Internet
Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014
On 12/07/2013 08:28 AM, Jen Jack Gieseking wrote: To determine exactly what versions of papers you are allowed to post publicly per contracts, you can use the Sherpa Romeo database to search copyright policies of most journals in a clear, easy to understand format: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/. JJG
-- Jen Jack Gieseking, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media and Data Visualization Digital and Computational Studies Initiative, Bowdoin College jgieseking@gmail.com www.jgieseking.org<http://www.jgieseking.org> www.spatiallyinclined.org<http://www.spatiallyinclined.org> @jgieseking <https://twitter.com/jgieseking>
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm@uwm.edu> wrote:
Precisely.
-- Michael Zimmer, PhD Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies Director, Center for Information Policy Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee e: zimmerm@uwm.edu w: www.michaelzimmer.org<http://www.michaelzimmer.org>
On Dec 7, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Joseph Reagle <joseph.2011@reagle.org> wrote:
On 12/06/2013 10:41 PM, Michael Zimmer wrote: Whoever wrote this isn't very familiar with publisher copyright transfer agreements. Some publishers often distinguish between the author's draft and the final peer reviewed and paginated version. That is, posting a draft on your site (or to SSRN, say) is permissible, copying the final version is not. Hence I'm curious as to which these removed versions were?
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ ____________________________________________________________ Gaviscon® Official Site Gaviscon® Relieves Heartburn Fast! See Products, Heartburn Info & More http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3265/52a39dc27d2081dc20df6mp05duc
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
participants (13)
-
Darren Purcell -
Edward M. Corrado -
Gil De Zuniga, Homero -
Jen Jack Gieseking -
John McNutt -
Joseph Reagle -
Mathieu ONeil -
Michael Zimmer -
Nathaniel Poor -
Raphael Garcia -
Richard Forno -
Robert W. Gehl -
יוחנן ועקנין