Open Access And The Art Of Contract Hacking
from the that's-sneaky dept
Open Access continues to gain momentum, as more and more researchers seek to make their work freely available online. One way of doing that is by modifying the contract that academic publishers routinely send to potential authors, inserting a clause that allows digital copies to be distributed.
That's been working quite well, but some publishers are starting to object, as Freedom To Tinker blogger Andrew Appel discovered recently (link found via BoingBoing.) The Association of Computing Machinery, which claims to be "the world’s largest educational and scientific computing society", sent him an email that stated it "does not accept copyright Addenda that exceed the liberal rights retained by authors under ACM’s Copyright Policy and the exclusive grant of copyright to ACM as publisher".
But Appel has come up with a neat idea for getting round this block:
In the strange field of computer science, we publish most of our scholarly articles in refereed conferences. In other fields they have unrefereed conferences and refereed journals. We have journals too, but they are less important than the top conferences. In a typical CS conference, 200 or 300 papers are submitted, three months later they have been refereed and 30 or 50 papers are accepted; three weeks later the authors must send in their full-length refereed articles as camera-ready PDF files. Then the conference proceedings must appear (in print and online) within a short time, a few weeks later, when the conference convenes.
Imagine, then, he says, if enough of those authors of the accepted papers simply wrote in a change to their publishing contracts regardless of what publishers might have said about accepting them. The publisher could, in theory, reject those papers, but then it would have a rather thin conference volume, since it could not easily find alternatives to fill the missing pages in the short time period available. As Appel says:
If the volume appears but missing three-fourths of its papers, then that conference is effectively dead, and may never recover in future years.
The publisher is unlikely to run that risk, and so will probably acquiesce to open access for those papers.
Of course, this approach will only work in those disciplines that have such conferences and refereed conference volumes produced to tight deadlines. But that's not really a problem. This isn't about converting the entire academic publishing industry to open access overnight, it's about keeping up the pressure to move there sooner rather than later.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: contract hacking, open access, publishing, research
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Building a Beach
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Prisoner's Dilemma
And why are CS researchers of all people so slow to route around such bottlenecks? Haven't they heard of the internet? Physicists and biologists are way ahead of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Prisoner's Dilemma
Of course they have. The fact is that the ACM isn't really the go-to place for cutting edge research papers, so the comparison to other fields is a bit tenuous. There's not much to route around. I can't remember the last time I needed an ACM paper in the course of researching, and I research a lot.
The ACM's role is primarily to make your resume look a little more impressive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Prisoner's Dilemma
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Prisoner's Dilemma
There's 4 big names in CS that I'm aware of , IEEE, ACM, Springer and to a lesser extent Elseveir (they get a fair bit of CS stuff though it usually comes from the direction of applying CS theory to Science problems, but that's still important in the sense that a lot of algorithms are basically impossible to assess without being applied to practical problems).
So depending on your field of interest you may never look at ACM stuff, or it might be one of your major resources.
Part of this problem in CS is that Conferences are so important, and these things do take money to organize and run. Given that and since the publication/conference organizations are also our professional associations,people tend to be less willing to stick it to them than they would be in other fields where the publishers are just publishers and completely separate to the actual concerns of academics. I imagine you'll find things are fairly similar in the engineering area too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Prisoner's Dilemma
Why CS people are the last ones to go open.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Easier Solution
The copyright from the conference could not apply to the other work since it had already been released under a CC license that predates the contract.
The conference could reject the paper, but it would have to find the other version of the paper first. If you take proper precautions, that shouldn't happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Easier Solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Easier Solution
It'd be like selling someone an apple orchid and then producing something that was once an apple orchid and currently has one badly tended apple tree on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Easier Solution
As I understand it, you could CC a paper with no restrictions, basically make it public domain, and then modify that paper to attain a new copyright on the work. That is perfectly legal. In fact, academic publishers do that all the time by affixing a mark to all the pages so they can issue take downs on otherwise public domain works.
I believe turn about is fair play here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
self archiving
[ link to this | view in chronology ]