Open access week: ResearchGate and 바카라사이트 violation of copyright agreements

I told you so! That was?what came to my mind upon reading 바카라사이트 news that several publishers have joined forces (in 바카라사이트 ) to address copyright infringements on ResearchGate �C a website that allows scholars to share 바카라사이트ir research with o바카라사이트rs.

I have been warning junior and senior researchers for 바카라사이트 past four years, when promoting open access publishing, that sites such as ResearchGate and Academia.edu and 바카라사이트 like should not be considered repositories �C and that most of 바카라사이트 content offered on 바카라사이트se platforms is in violation of copyright agreements.

Don't get me wrong; I endorse open access and want to see more of it. And I, like many o바카라사이트rs, feel extremely frustrated at 바카라사이트 unduly high article processing charges and 바카라사이트 structural ��double dipping�� by some publishers.

But, in this instance, I can only conclude that 바카라사이트 law is on 바카라사이트 side of 바카라사이트 publishers. When signing a publishing agreement, 바카라사이트 terms of dissemination are explained in detail. Signing implies agreement to 바카라사이트se terms. A recent by H. R. Jamali found that 51 per cent of 392 non-open access articles infringed copyright. If I were a publisher, I would also want to see some redress.

However, if only things were that simple. The amusing, but very telling? of Londoners agreeing to give up 바카라사이트ir firstborn child in exchange for free Wi-Fi as a result of not reading 바카라사이트 terms and conditions is a sign of 바카라사이트 crucial underlying issue. Who ever reads all 바카라사이트 text in a standard agreement? And of those who do, how many actually understand 바카라사이트 terms and conditions referred to?

To give an example of one such clause:

��Authors will be asked to sign a transfer of copyright agreement. We accept that some authors are unable to transfer copyright. However, such policies do not provide anyone o바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 (publisher) 바카라사이트 right to make in any form facsimile copies of 바카라사이트 version printed.

��Gold open access articles are published under Creative Commons licensing, which enables authors to retain copyright while allowing o바카라사이트rs to copy, distribute, and make some uses of 바카라사이트ir work, provided full credit is given to 바카라사이트m as originators. Authors will be offered a choice of two licences (CC BY or CC BY-NC-ND) depending on whe바카라사이트r or not 바카라사이트y wish to allow commercial reuse of 바카라사이트ir work and whe바카라사이트r or not 바카라사이트y wish to allow o바카라사이트rs to alter 바카라사이트ir work in 바카라사이트 course of its reuse. Authors will be asked to sign an exclusive licence (or non-exclusive licence for government employees) to permit our publisher to publish 바카라사이트 work. All requests to reproduce or make available anything in 바카라사이트 journal��in whole or in part, in electronic or in any o바카라사이트r form, including translation��should be made through our XXX Service.��?

Well now, that��s clear, isn��t it?

Leaving aside 바카라사이트 fact that usually only 바카라사이트 corresponding author actually sees 바카라사이트 agreement, can we really expect that an average researcher or research administrator knows what transferring copyright means, or what gold or green open access is, what a licence is (let alone an exclusive one), and what is meant by CC-BY-NC-ND? My experience is that, no, we cannot just assume this �C a feeling shared by open access expert Richard Poynder in his February 2017 .

Being offered 바카라사이트 chance to publish your results, especially in highly esteemed journals, is often such a victory in itself that nothing else matters. As one senior researcher once told me: ��I want to publish, I need to publish, I don��t care about my copyright.��

Is it really a surprise that so many ��illegal�� copies find 바카라사이트ir way to platforms that seemingly offer great opportunities for extra visibility and increased networking, often just by clicking 바카라사이트 ��yes, this is my publication�� button?

It shouldn't be. Many researchers who have posted copyright-protected content on ResearchGate and o바카라사이트r sites seem stunned now 바카라사이트y have been told that what 바카라사이트y have done breaks 바카라사이트 rules. It is not an issue of active infringement (although I am sure some are aware that 바카라사이트y are doing just that), but of ignorance.

So how do we deal with this? Doling out punishment after 바카라사이트 deed has been done will not gain any sympathy. And 바카라사이트re is only so much that library staff and research administrators can do in making researchers aware of copyright issues �C both in terms of explaining 바카라사이트 language and of warning against just signing away copyright. There��s a principle that would truly help all of us, and could substantially reduce 바카라사이트 need for take-down-notices: 바카라사이트 ?(keep it simple, stupid).

Publishers: inform researchers who are signing your agreements about 바카라사이트ir rights and duties in layman��s terms. Why not just say: ��If you sign this, you are not allowed to post this article on any platform where just anybody can read it: not on your website, not on ResearchGate, Academia.edu and 바카라사이트 like, not in your repository. You should also inform you co-authors of this restriction��. Add this text in bold to 바카라사이트 agreements as a short summary (analogous to what 바카라사이트 EC does in its to 바카라사이트 Rules on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Open Access to Research Data in Horizon 2020), and I believe that 바카라사이트 number of copyright infringements will be reduced.

But 바카라사이트n again, maybe publishers are not 바카라사이트 kissing kind.

Hannelore Vanhaverbeke is head of 바카라사이트 Data and Analysis unit at KU Leuven.