MedOAnet: The copyright landscape in Southern Europe an overview

Transkript

1 MedOAnet: The copyright landscape in Southern Europe an overview Dr. Karin Ludewig, ENCES e.v. Alles auf dem Europäischen Weg? Zu einem Urheberrecht für Open Workshop of the Urheberrecht für Bildung und Wissenschaft e.v. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin 10 December 2012

2 MedOAnet Mediterranean Open Access network funded by the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development (FP7) SiS: 'Science in society' initiative 1 December November /12/2012 1

3 MedOAnet France Greece (Coordinator) Italy Portugal Spain Turkey 19/12/2012 2

4 MedOAnet project partners Southern European project partners: CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (France) National Documentation Centre/NHRF (Greece) CASPUR - Consorzio Interuniversitario per le Applicazioni di Supercalcolo Università e Ricerca (Italy) UMINHO - University of Minho (Portugal) FECYT - Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología (Spain) HACETTEPE UNIVERSITESI - Hacettepe University (Turkey) Northern European project partners: ENCES - European Network for Copyright in Support of Education and Science (Germany) LIBER - The Stichting LIBER Foundation (The Netherlands) UNOTT - University of Nottingham (United Kingdom) 19/12/2012 3

5 MedOAnet Advisory Board Alma Swan, Key Perspectives Ltd, SPARC Europe and Enabling Open Scholarship Norbert Lossau, Niedersächsische Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen, Scientific Coordinator/OpenAIRE(plus) project Lluís Anglada, Director CBUC (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitàries de Catalunya) 19/12/2012 4

6 MedOAnet project aims Policies, strategies and structures for Open Access in Southern European countries identify and map (OA-Tracker) coordinate and enhance engage key policy-makers and stakeholders of Open Access produce guidelines for policy makers 19/12/2012 5

7 MedOAnet surveys Mapping of the current situation Survey target groups: Research funders Research performing institutions (universities, repository operators etc.) Publishers 10 th April th June 2012 ENCES analysis of the results: Some Observations on Copyright and IP Issues (August 2012) 19/12/2012 6

8 MedOAnet surveys Publishers survey: Q10-Q20 on copyright issues re Green Road OA Q24-Q25 on copyright issues re Golden Road OA Research performing institutions survey: Q13, Q29 Research funders survey: none 19/12/2012 7

9 Publishers survey Survey was sent to: publishers Response rate 12.3% (absolute: 187) response rate: 12.3% publishers 1.6% 4.8% Q2: What is your country? 3.7% 10.2% Greece Spain % 62.6% Portugal France Italy Turkey handed out to answered 19/12/2012 8

10 Publishers survey Q4: Your press is: independent and private academic press (company) 17.6% other 11.2% scientific association / learned society press 32.6% 71.1% publicly funded presses National / Government Body (e.g. ministry) 4.8% academic institution press (e.g. university press, research centre press, etc) 33.7% 19/12/2012 9

11 Publishers survey Q5: Your press is a: Large-sized press (more than 80 titles per year) 10.2% self-publisher 18.7% Small-sized press (fewer than 10 titles per year) 42.2% Medium-sized press (between 10 and 80 titles per year) 28.9% 71.1% small and medium-sized presses (SMEs) 19/12/

12 Publishers survey Q7: What fields do you publish in? Social Sciences: 50.0% Humanities: 40.9% Medical and Health Sciences: 29.5% Natural Sciences: 19.3% Engineering and Technology: 13.6% Agricultural Sciences: 12.5% 19/12/

13 Publishers survey % Q8: Do you publish? 54.4% Journals Books Other (e.g. conference proceedings, technical reports, etc) kinds of copyrighted works 19/12/

14 Publishers survey Q9: Do you exercise peer-review on the content you publish? 3.4% yes no 96.6% 19/12/

15 Contractual transfer of exploitation rights The publisher requires transfer of exclusive exploitation rights 23.1% other 2.3% transfer of non-exclusive exploitation rights 11.0% no contract 63.6% 19/12/

16 Contractual transfer of exploitation rights other 2,3% transfer of exclusive exploitation rights 23,1% transfer of nonexclusive exploitation rights 11,0% no contract 63,6% 19/12/

17 Contractual transfer of exploitation rights Transfer of exclusive exploitation rights 23.1% 19/12/

18 Contractual transfer of exploitation rights Transfer of exclusive exploitation rights 23.1% OA publication negotiable 7.2% 19/12/

19 Contractual transfer of exploitation rights Transfer of exclusive exploitation rights 23.1% 7 independent and private academic presses 15 academic institution presses 11 scientific association / learned society presses 2 governmental bodies 19/12/

20 Self-archiving policies Q14: Do you permit authors to archive their work in OA repositories? 15.8% yes no 84.2% 19/12/

21 Self-archiving policies Q15: Which version of the manuscript do you permit authors to selfarchive? Q16: When do you permit authors to make their work available in OA repositories? 3.2% 5.6% after peer-review 29.4% 50.8% 16.7% pre-print version post-print version publishers's version any version 9.5% 17.5% 9.5% 51.6% when published 6 months after publication 12 months after publication unspecified 6.3% other 19/12/

22 PR Q12, : Availability to the public of your copyright and self-archiving policies? answers (in absolute numbers) yes no 20 0 copyright policy on website self-archiving policy on website in Sherpa/Romeo 19/12/

23 Golden Road OA Q24: Do you use standardized licenses to set the terms of use of your OA publications? Q25: Which licenses do you use? 1.9% 1.9% CC yes no % % 96.2% GNU other 19/12/

24 Surprisingly OAfriendly results Reasons? Low response rate 12.3% => only converted publishers answered the survey High percentage of publicly funded presses in the sample High esteem of oral expression in Mediterranean cultures => low rate of contracts (36.8%) Further improving the results by: Development of OA-conductive information policy Awareness-rising 19/12/

25 More on MedOAnet /12/