Re: Get the Institutional Repository Managers Out of the Decision Loop

From: Millington Peter <Peter.Millington_at_NOTTINGHAM.AC.UK>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 18:02:43 +0100

The policies in the OpenDOAR Policies Tool were derived mainly from an
extensive survey of around 300 repositories that was undertaken at the
beginning of 2006. The options therefore generally reflect the actual
permissions, restrictions and practices of real repository
administrators. Some are sites VERY open with their material (e.g.
Lincoln's "You may do as you wish with any metadata harvested from this
site") to highly propriatorial (e.g. ULP Strasbourg's "Text, data and
images should not be downloaded, nor redistributed nor published anywhere
It is up to users of the Policies Tool as to how open or restrictive they
are. Administrators can, and perhaps should bypass the restrictive
options. Les's example is a case in point. (A few repositories had shot
themselves in the foot by prohibiting all harvesting, thus disallowing
Google and other search engines from indexing their content. We therefore
added the riders - adapted from Caltech's policies - to improve matters.)
The Tool also provides links that automatically select "minimal" or
"optimal" policies. The "minimal" policies generally do the least
possible to comply with the spirit of Open Access, whereas conversely the
"Optimal" policies go as far as possible to promote re-use (and encourage
best practices). We've tried to do a good job with the policy options and
recommendations, but are not written in stone. There is always room for
improvement, so if Les or anyone else has any constructive suggestions,
we would be very happy to receive them.
Peter Millington

From: Leslie Carr []
Sent: 12 June 2007 16:26
To: American Scientist Open Access Forum
Cc: Millington Peter
Subject: Re: Get the Institutional Repository Managers Out of the
Decision Loop

      Peter Murray-Rust [PM-R] replied:

            "Stevan Harnad... has been consistent in
            arguing the logic [of what comes with the
            OA territory]... and I agree with the
            logic... [but]... several repository
            managers at the JISC meeting [said] I could
            not have permission to do [such things]
            with their current content. I asked 'can my
            robots download and mine the content in
            your current open access repository of
            theses?' - No. 'Can you let me have some
            chemistry theses from your open access
            collection so I can data-mine them?' - No -
            you will have to ask the permission of each
            author individually.

The OpenDOAR repository policies tool tends to act towards
over-cautiousness in the policies that they suggest for data and
document reuse.
The current policies that they produce have options to explicitly
allow services  that do full text indexing and citation analysis,
By enumerating the potential allowable services they are
effectively stifling innovation and research, and that is a BAD
thing. The last thing that OA advocates ought to do is build up
ANOTHER rights-withholding infrastructure.

I do hope that this a a short-sighted transition phenomenon, but it
should certainly be addressed now (and strongly).
Les Carr
This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses, which could damage your
computer system: you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.
Received on Tue Jun 12 2007 - 19:05:02 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:48:58 GMT