http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/08-02-07.htm

Peter Suber has mailed the new SOA-Newsletter. This issue takes a close look at a bill moving through Congress that would require open access for NIH-funded research.

Excerpt:

Even though immediate OA is in the public interest, I'm willing to accept some embargo. Publishers like to say that they add value by facilitating peer review by expert volunteers. This is accurate but one-sided. What they leave out is that the funding agency adds value as well, and that the cost of a research project is often thousands of times greater than the cost of publication. If adding value gives one a claim to control access to the result, then at least two stakeholder organizations have that claim, and one of them has a much weightier claim than the publisher. But if publishers and taxpayers both make a contribution to the value of peer-reviewed articles arising from publicly-funded research, then the right question is not which side to favor, without compromise, but which compromise to favor. So far I haven't heard a better solution than a period of exclusivity for the publisher followed by free online access for the public. This compromise-by-time is buttressed by a second compromise-by-version: publishers retain control over the published edition for the life of copyright while the public receives OA to the peer-reviewed but unedited author manuscript. Publishers who want to block OA mandates per se, rather than just negotiate the embargo period, are saying that there should be no compromise, that the public should get nothing for its investment, and that publishers should control access to research conducted by others, written up by others, and funded by taxpayers.

The University of Michigan gives search tips for Google Books:

http://www.lib.umich.edu/mdp/GoogleBooks.pdf

Excerpt:

There is no, single “right” way to find the needed year or volume number. There are some general tips, though, to try to tease this information out of Google Book Search. All of these tips should be used in the Search in this book search box:
• Search for the title of the journal. Sometimes this will show you a snippet that includes a running header that will contain a year or a volume number.
• Search for the words “volume” and “issue”.
• Search for the word “subscriptions”. Many times, journals will have a subscription information section that will include the pricing for the current year (and it will tell you which year is the ‘current’ year).
• After trying these three options, you may have a feel for the time period, but perhaps not an exact year. If you have been seeing dates hovering around the 1950’s, try searching for years, like “1956”, and “1957”. Chances are, if you have results for “1956”, but no results for “1957”, the issue you are looking at is probably from 1956 or 1955.
Once you’ve got the volume and issue number, you’ll likely still need to know the page numbers of the full article you’re looking for. Contact a library that has this title and ask if you can get the page numbers of the article you’re interested in, then use your local library’s interlibrary loan department if an issue isn’t near to where you are.

I can add the following tips:

- Try to find "Tables of content" (TOC) of the journal online.
- There are often "Key words and phrases" Google presents. This might be useless to represent the content of the volume but this keywords are often taken from the TOC. You can compare them with an online-TOC or quotations of articles found via Google or Google Scholar.
- You can make the same with the "sections" content Google gives.
- Use "Jahrgang" or "Band" when searching journals in German (Sample)
- If there are "other editions" look at the dates. If the dates are differing it might be that the Google's publication date "Published" is right. (But it also might be it is wrong ...)

An example for identifying the volume:

http://books.google.com/books?q=nassauische+annalen+schwaben&btnG=Search+Books

1972 is evidently wrong, because by searching the volume "Alterthumskunde" appears often. It must be an XIXth century volume:

http://books.google.com/books?id=9j0KAAAAIAAJ&dq=nassauische+annalen+schwaben&q=nassauische+annalen+&pgis=1#search

Searching for "jahrgang" doesn't help.

Searching for "band" gives the hypothesis that it might volume 6.

The TOC is online at:
http://www.erlangerhistorikerseite.de/zfhm/nassa6.html

Some tests with words taken from the keywords and sections (aesculap, limpurg ...) were failing. If one takes "inschriften" from the online-TOC: bingo! It is volume 6, 1859/60:

http://books.google.com/books?id=9j0KAAAAIAAJ&dq=nassauische+annalen+schwaben&q=inschriften&pgis=1#search

It often takes long time to find the right issue.

Unfortunately, "as opposed to other countries, in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, typesetting in Fraktur was very common still in the early 20th century" (Wikipedia). If there are right recognized words in Fraktur journals it is very hard or impossible to find out the volume as described!

***

Here is another example for English speaking readers:

http://books.google.com/books?id=OAwbAAAAIAAJ&q=wolfram+date:1920-1930&dq=wolfram+date:1920-1930&num=100&pgis=1

Google: "Published 1926".

The search for subscription (or copyright) allows the hypothesis that it is Speculum 36, 1961.

A Google search for Speculum 36 1961:
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=speculum+36+1961&btnG=Google-Suche&meta=

If you search inside the book for Johnson you can find a snippet from the journal's TOC:
http://books.google.com/books?num=100&id=OAwbAAAAIAAJ&dq=wolfram+date%3A1920-1930&q=johnson&pgis=1#search

Now it is easy to proof that the volume is indeed 36, 1961.

"WRLC Digital Collections Production Center just created an online scrapbook. This scrapbook was compiled by James Michael Carroll while he was a student at The Catholic University of America (Washington, DC) from 1916 to 1920. The online scrapbook is the digital version of this original scrapbook.

This digital scrapbook can be viewed in two different versions. You can virtually "flip" through the pages of the scrapbook, zoom in to view items in greater details, jump to a certain page, click on the highlighted item to view large image, and view small booklets (p21, p56, etc.) in another flipping-book."

http://dspace.wrlc.org/doc/bitstream/2041/51485/Carroll-book.swf

http://www.spellboundblog.com/2007/07/29/publicresourceorg-creative-financing-and-public-domain-content/

Very interesting blog entry. See also
http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/3742519/
http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/3813538/ (German)

Here is a video sample on minority inventors purchased for the public:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=435853089667284660&hl=en

http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust/?p=439

So it seems clear that we have to have licences. I shall take the following position:

* Any publisher or author who exposes a CC-BY or Open Knowledge Foundation licence I shall call “OA-BY”. This permits full data re-use.
* Any publisher or author who exposes a CC-NC or CC-ND or similar I shall call OA-NC or OA-ND. This does not permit full data re-use but does permit some. We may have to kludge some of the worst “conditions” like “you may post this on your web site but not in your institutional repository”
* Any publisher or author who posts a paper that I can read I shall call OA-FREE.

An excellent suggestion by Peter Murray-Rust.

On July 5 I wrote to Peter Suber:

PeterS: "What he could have added is that most OA journals do use a CC license or equivalent. Hence, it usually is safe to assume that OA journals expressly permit scholarly uses beyond fair use."

KG: I think this is in no way right. Nearly all journals in DOAI have the usual copyright notices. There are very important CC licensed
journals (PLoS, BMC, Hindawi) and a lot of other e-journals with
similar licenses but this is a small minority.

On July 6 I wrote him the results of a little test:

KG: I have checked ALL 27 new journals in DOAJ. I have found 3 CC-licensed journals:
one BMC journal = by
SC-JR = by
one French mathematics journal cc-by-nc-nd
one cc recommendation (but no cc content found), theological journal

The rest has "all rights reserved" or "personal and classroom uses" or no notice (a lot of journals). Due to language difficulties it is
possible that I have overlooked some notices but I do not think that I have overlooked CC licenses or clearly marked similar licenses.

It's not a proof but an impressive random sample.

On September 3, 2004 I commented in this weblog an entry of PeterS:

I do not agree with the conclusion that BBB "doesn't require removing barriers to commercial re-use".

BOAI says: "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." In my opinion that clearly allows commercial re-use. I do not see that "for any responsible purpose" in the Berlin declaration (and the Bethesda definition) excludes commercial re-use.

Suber has avoided mentioning the fact hat PLoS has chosen a less restrictive Creative Commons license (attribution, derivative works and commercial re-use allowed).

I would like to reduce BBB to one B: Berlin. Berlin is the broadest (and latest, basing on Budapest and - mainly - Bethesda) consensus of the Open Access community. Berlin clearly allows derivative works. We should not say that policies which forbidd derivative works are'nt "true Open Access" but we can say that they are definitively NOT compatible with the Berlin declaration.

And, by the way, we can definitively say that the Lund criteria for Open Access Journals (http://www.doaj.org) are NOT compatible with the BBB definition. Most of the listed journals allows only free access (journals with an embargo period are not listed) and have copyright reservations - no permission barriers are removed. I have called this "Open Access LIGHT". The Open Access Community praises the Lund directory (although the EZB is much more better) but will not see the fact that the Lund criteria are exactly in the same way misleading as the diluting publisher's use of "Open Access".

What I have called OPEN ACCESS LIGHT is Murray Rust's OA-FREE.

There was also a suggestion in 2005 mady by Charles W. Bailey Jr.:

http://www.escholarlypub.com/digitalkoans/2005/05/13/the-spectrum-of-e-journal-access-policies-open-to-restricted-access/

To fully understand where things stand with journal access policies, we need to clarify and name the policies in use. While the below list may not be comprehensive, it attempts to provide a first-cut model for key journal access policies, adopting the now popular use of colors as a second form of shorthand for identifying the policy types.

1. Open Access journals (OA journals, color code: green): These journals provide free access to all articles and utilize a form of licensing that puts minimal restrictions on the use of articles, such as the Creative Commons Attribution License. Example: Biomedical Digital Libraries.
2. Free Access journals (FA journals, color code: cyan): These journals provide free access to all articles and utilize a variety of copyright statements (e.g., the journal copyright statement may grant liberal educational copying provisions), but they do not use a Creative Commons Attribution License or similar license. Example: The Public-Access Computer Systems Review.
3. Embargoed Access journals (EA journals, color code: yellow): These journals provide free access to all articles after a specified embargo period and typically utilize conventional copyright statements. Example: Learned Publishing.
4. Partial Access journals (PA journals, color code: orange): These journals provide free access to selected articles and typically utilize conventional copyright statements. Example: College & Research Libraries.
5. Restricted Access journals (RA journals, color code: red): These journals provide no free access to articles and typically utilize conventional copyright statements. Example: Library Administration and Management. (Available in electronic form from Library Literature & Information Science Full Text and other databases.)

He has repeated the color codes in his well-known text
http://www.digital-scholarship.com/cwb/OALibraries2.pdf

Now it's more complicated because there are publisher's experiments called HYBRID JOURNALS with Partial OA (payed OA and publisher-sponsored free articles).

It is not clear which color code journals have which are operating with changing free sample issues.

There are three independent criteria for the "openness" of journals (let aside the DOAJ criterium "peer-reviewed"):

1. time of free access (the embargo-question)

This is the only question Stevan Harnad is interested in.

If we can call the OA-FREE journals of DOAJ "OA" we should also can call on the article level free accessible articles after an embargo "OA".

2. Is OA permanent/irrevocable?

OA journals can change their publishing model to TA, and journal websites can disappear from the internet.

All what we can say on this topic is relative. We don't know the circumstances in 50 years for journal publishing.

3. Are there licenses/labels?

This is an essential question not only for the data re-use PMR wants.

The DOAJ entry should mention the license status of each journal!

The 1493 latin Nuremberg edition is digitized at:

Olmuetz
http://dig.vkol.cz/dig/iii47715/popis.htm

Andalucia
http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/cultura/bibliotecavirtualandalucia/catalogo_imagenes/grupo.cmd?path=10150

Sao Paulo
http://www.obrasraras.usp.br/obras/000192/

Madrid
http://alfama.sim.ucm.es/dioscorides/consulta_libro.asp?ref=B19111447

Sevilla
http://fondotesis.us.es/books/digitalbook_view?oid_page=154550

Santiago de Compostela
http://iacobus.usc.es/search*gag?/sBUSC+dixital+incunables/sbusc+dixital+incunables/1,1,141,B/l856~b1959913&FF=sbusc+dixital+incunables&53,,141,1,0

Poland
http://zbc.uz.zgora.pl/Content/6086/Schedel+Hartman+-+Liber+chronicarum.djvu
http://www.polona.pl/Content/2923/8728_Liber_chroni.html

Incunabula editions in German are available at:

http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Schedel%E2%80%99sche_Weltchronik

http://mdz1.bib-bvb.de/cocoon/bsbink/Exemplar_S-199,1.html

http://informationatrix.wordpress.com/

My name is Kate (or Katie…or, if you’re feeling formal, Katherine) Crowe.

I am a recent (May 2007) Library and Information Science graduate from Emporia State University, though I am from (and currently reside in) Lawrence, Kansas. My studies and professional aspirations have an archival bent to them, and I hope to, someday, work someplace like here, or, if the U.K. will have me, here.

As I’ve recently graduated, I’m in the throes of job searching, applying for jobs, and interviewing.

A nice photo album on http://flickr.com/photos/81313254@N00/385158978/in/set-72157594527222929/.

A fantasy book named The Archivist, can it be good at all?http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/a/gill-alderman/archivist.htm