Avid and continual readers of this blog will remember that some of us in the Blue Obelisk have set out to monitor the posted policy and licenses of “open access” publishers or publishers which offer some “open access” products. We are going systematically, though more slowly that we would have liked (and happy to have committed volunteers) through the public pages of these publishers.
Some are easy – they state simply that they offer CC-BY licenses. Others have more complex pages, which sometimes are inconsistent. We are blogging such instances – hopefully in an objective fashion – and giving the publishers the opportunity to clarify policies.
I commented factually on a journal published by Libertas Academica (“Open Access” at libertas academica). Now we have great news – they (Tom Hill) understand the issue and are making simple and positive changes to their site. I reproduce the mail in full.
To:
Dear Dr Rust,Earlier today I read your blog entry on OA at Libertas Academica (http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust/?p=415) with great interest. I regret not having done so earlier, although I came upon it as a result of an uncharacteristic bout of Saturday morning corporate navel-gazing by way of a Google search on the company’s name. I have now added your blog’s RSS feed to my bookmarks and I’m sure I’ll become a regular reader.I very much appreciate your critique on our OA policy. It appears that in our haste to develop our journals we have neglected to make our policy, particularly with respect to copyright, as transparent as it should be.I have therefore made the following changes:1. We now clearly apply the CC-BY licence.2. I have asked our web developer to remove the obsolete copyright statement from the bottom of all web pages. Given that this is Saturday, this change will probably not take place until Monday NZ time.3. I’ve also asked said developer to fix the link between www.la-press.com/copyright.htm and www.la-press.com/authors.php?content_id=40.I wonder if you would be willing to communicate the gist of these changes to your readers in some way? Irrespective of this, thanks for your feedback.Regards,Tom Hill____________________________________________Tom Hill“Analytical Chemistry Insights” “Biomarker Insights” “Bioinformatics and Biology Insights” “Cancer Informatics” “Clinical Medicine: Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Disorders” “Clinical Medicine: Cardiology” “Clinical Medicine: Circulatory, Respiratory and Pulmonary Medicine” “Clinical Medicine: Oncology” “Drug Target Insights” “Evolutionary Bioinformatics” “Gene Regulation and Systems Biology” “Integrative Medicine Insights” “Perspectives in Medicinal Chemistry” “Translational OncoGenomics”LIBERTAS ACADEMICA
This is wonderful – and I hope that many of the problem we have will turn out to be simple lack of clarity on web pages.
On our side we hope – in time – to be able to summarise the acccess and re-use rights of all “open access” chemistry publishers. We started with “Analytical Chemistry Insights” because it was the first in the alphabet – so if you are a publisher of chemistry listed on the DOAJ list and your journal is later in the alphabet than “A” and you wish to clarify your website before we get to you … please drop us a note.
In summary this shows dramatically the value of labels.
That is excellent — kudos to Libertas Academia!
Dear Dr Hill, expect a ms from me asap. I will be writing a review of the biology of the transcription factor Mnt in preparation for an upcoming data ms, so I will submit that review for starters.
(1) This is gratifying and shows the value of creating an infrastructure where people agree on values and practice (earlier Bill said that he was not inclined to publish in non-CC-BY journals).
Libertas Academia as well as Dove Medical Press (both based in Auckland and both associated with the name Tom Hill as publisher) use aggressive and illegal spamming as a marketing technique (OA journals “market” themselves to authors) and have been added to the blacklist of spamming open access publishers. After having received spam emails from Libertas Academica on Jan 29, 2008, March 4th, March 23rd, April 21st, May 8th, Jun 10th, Jun 18th, I received the 8th spam email today advertising another one of their throw-away journals, despite previous requests to stop sending any further emails to me. Dove Medical Press uses similar techniques and also ignores any requests to stop spamming.
I also found a website where “Dove Medical Press publisher Tim (sic!) Hill” praises a spam software.
I would suggest that authors and editorial board members stay away from companies that engage in these kinds of illegal activities, which by the way damage the reputation of open access journals.
Hopefully Mr Hill’s next “corporate navel-gazing by way of a Google search on the company’s name” will lead to finding a few blogs where researchers tell him what they think about his relentless spamming activities as a corporate strategy to attract authors.