Colin,
I think you are missing the point of the "button" here. The correct way to
phrase a mandate is that the "button" is solely a back-up to ONLY be used
when there is a publisher embargo. I think the OU is correct in keeping the
information requested to a minimum - a statement that the requester is
requesting it for purposes within the legal allowances for authors to
distribute it, and a contact address. Anyone really concerned with privacy
can use short-term single-use email addresses to make their requests.
Personally, I find that I want other schlars to know when I am reading their
work because it opens up the possibility of interaction, the next stage
beyond just reading people's work is to discuss it in more depth with them,
but this is a sideline compared to the mass access that is the purpose of OA.
The solution to the original question is for mandates to make clear what the
purpose of the button is, and to not allow depositors to place a barrier to
access where one is not necessary.
--
Dr Andrew A Adams, School of Systems Engineering
The University of Reading, Reading, RG6 6AY, UK
Tel:44-118-378-6997 E-mail:a.a.adams_at_rdg.ac.uk
http://www.rdg.ac.uk/~sis00aaa/
From 1st April 2010:
Professor, Graduate School of Business Administration, and
Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
Meiji University, Tokyo
Message-ID: <dummy921323693_at_invented.ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Received on Thu Feb 04 2010 - 12:51:34 GMT