> a full-text version is available for download (thus OA)
Worth remembering that OA is about more than being "available for download", at least according to the BOAI:
By 'open access' to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/boaifaq.htm#openaccess
Alternatively:
An Open Access Publication[1] is one that meets the following two conditions:
The author(s) and copyright holder(s) grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship[2], as well as the right to make small numbers of printed copies for their personal use.
A complete version of the work and all supplemental materials, including a copy of the permission as stated above, in a suitable standard electronic format is deposited immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository that is supported by an academic institution, scholarly society, government agency, or other well-established organization that seeks to enable open access, unrestricted distribution, interoperability, and long-term archiving (for the biomedical sciences, PubMed Central is such a repository).
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm
One of the issues with inventing a global OA button is that we'd have to agree what definition of OA it stood for ;-)
To answer my own original question, I note that there is the PLOS OA logo (see
http://bit.ly/7IyLfS), which is presumably associated with the second definition above, see:
http://www.plos.org/oa/definition.html
and which does appear to be embedded into the PDF versions of (all?) PLOS papers - so that is the kind of thing I was thinking about but I'm not sure if it is intended to be used generally, or just for PLOS publications??
Andy
Andy Powell
Research Programme Director
Eduserv
andy.powell_at_eduserv.org.uk
01225 474319 / 07989 476710
www.eduserv.org.uk
efoundations.typepad.com
twitter.com/andypowe11
________________________________________
From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On Behalf Of Andy Powell [andy.powell_at_EDUSERV.ORG.UK]
Sent: 20 January 2010 10:36
To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
Subject: Re: Roundtable Press Release (Access to Research Results)
> From my experience, it is quite obvious in the metada page of the
> article when a full-text version is available for download (thus OA )
> or from the author on request (“closed access”).
Two thoughts...
Firstly, there is an implication here that people's route to the full-text is always via the 'metadata page'. That might well be how we've chosen to design the system but it isn't necessarily safe to assume that is how it always works ?
Secondly, your "experience" (I assume) is as someone who is familiar with and understands the notions of 'open access' and 'repositories'. I thought the point of this thread (and what you were arguing in your earlier message) is that in the wider general population of researchers there is still confusion about these things. Apologies if I misunderstood you.
So, while an OA button (embedded into both the metadata page and the full-text for maximum exposure) might not help you, it might help raise awareness of OA more generally?
I don't have an evidence to hand, but I don't think it would be an unreasonable assumption that the development of clear CC logos and buttons was a big help in raising awareness of what CC were trying to do ??
Andy
Andy Powell
Research Programme Director
Eduserv
andy.powell_at_eduserv.org.uk
01225 474319 / 07989 476710
www.eduserv.org.uk
efoundations.typepad.com
twitter.com/andypowe11
________________________________________
From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On Behalf Of Marc Couture [jaamcouture_at_GMAIL.COM]
Sent: 19 January 2010 18:57
To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
Subject: Re: Roundtable Press Release (Access to Research Results)
Andy Powell wrote:
>
> Has anyone ever considered developing an 'OA' button (a bit like the CC ones) that
> can be added to individual articles? [...] the repository could be made to automatically
> add it each time a document is uploaded
>
From my experience, it is quite obvious in the metada page of the
article when a full-text version is available for download (thus OA )
or from the author on request (“closed access”).
Message-ID: <dummy9762458554_at_invented.ecs.soton.ac.uk>
There is also the (undocumented) Google Scholar's green triangle (see
http://bit.ly/5cAlrX for details), which seems to be good at
identifying repository-based versions, but apparently less in the case
of “free” (gratis) articles on publisher websites.
Sally Morris wrote:
>
> Our article [in the journal Learned Publishing ] is, indeed, OA
> (as the copyright line on the first page makes clear).
>
I had overlooked the footnote mentioning the CC license, but one
normally expects a CC icon to be displayed on the website. Anyway,
this is an issue mostly for someone who wants to evaluate the number
or ratio of (gold) OA articles. The “normal” user understands soon
enough if the article is free (at least for her) or available for a
fee (pay-per-view or subscription).
Marc Couture
Received on Wed Jan 20 2010 - 13:51:36 GMT