References
- 1Stephen J. Eglen, “Primer on the Rights Retention Strategy,” Zenodo, April 2021, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4668132 (accessed 19 July 2021).
- 2“Plan S Rights Retention Strategy,” cOAlition S,
https://www.coalition-s.org/rights-retention-strategy/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 3cOalition S, “Plan S Rights Retention Strategy.”
- 4Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe, “Explaining the Rights Retention Strategy,” The Scholarly Kitchen (blog), February 17, 2021,
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2021/02/17/rights-retention-strategy/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 5
“Author Rights: Using the SPARC Author Addendum,” SPARC North America,https://sparcopen.org/our-work/author-rights/brochure-html/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 6Deborah H. Charbonneau and Jonathan McGlone, “Faculty experiences with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) public access policy, compliance issues, and copyright practices,” Journal of the Medical Library Association 101, no. 1 (2013): 21–25, DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.101.1.004 (accessed 19 July 2021).
- 7“Evaluating usage of the SPARC Author Addendum,” SPARC Europe,
https://sparceurope.org/evaluating-usage-sparc-author-addendum/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 8Patrick H. Alexander, “Open Access and Author Rights: Questioning Harvard’s Open Access Policy,” Insights 33, no. 1 (2020): 23, DOI: 10.1629/uksg.525 (accessed 19 July 2021).
- 9Peter Suber, “Author Rights and the Harvard Open Access Policies: A Response to Patrick Alexander,” Insights 34, no. 1 (2021): 8, DOI 10.1629/uksg.543 (accessed 19 July 2021).
- 10Stuart Shieber, “‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ rights retention for scholarly articles,” The Occasional Pamphlet (blog), June 18, 2009,
https://blogs.harvard.edu/pamphlet/2009/06/18/dont-ask-dont-tell-rights-retention-for-scholarly-articles/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 11Jonathan Tennant, “The ethics of copyright transfer for scientific research,” Green Tea and Velociraptors (blog), March 5, 2018,
http://fossilsandshit.com/ethics-copyright-transfer-scientific-research/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 12Charbonneau and McGlone, “Faculty experiences,” 21–25.
- 13Todd A. Carpenter, “Copyright Transfer As a Click-through – It’s So Easy to Sign Away Your Rights,” The Scholarly Kitchen (blog), March 6, 2013,
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/03/06/copyright-transfer-as-a-click-through-its-so-easy-to-sign-away-your-rights/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 14Carlisle Rainey, “RE: Do I have to sign a copyright transfer agreement to publish an article?,” StackExchange, August 16, 2015,
https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/52002/do-i-have-to-sign-a-copyright-transfer-agreement-to-publish-an-article#comment120344_52003 (accessed 19 July 2021). - 15Eglen, “Primer.”
- 16Robert Harington, “Plan S Rights Retention Strategy, copyright and the academic community – part one,” The Scholarly Kitchen (blog), February 18, 2021,
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2021/02/18/plan-s-rights-retention-strategy-copyright-and-the-academic-community-part-1/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 17Glenda A. Gertz, “Copyrights in Faculty-Created Works: How Licensing Can Solve the Academic Work-For-Hire Dilemma,” Washington Law Review 88, no. 4 (2013): 1465–1493,
https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol88/iss4/10/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 18Nathaniel S. Strauss, “Anything But Academic: How Copyright’s Work-For-Hire Doctrine Affects Professors, Graduate Students, and K-12 Teachers in the Information Age,” Richmond Journal of Law & Technology 18, no. 1 (2011): 5,
https://scholarship.richmond.edu/jolt/vol18/iss1/5/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 19Suber, “Author rights,” 8.
- 20Elizabeth Gadd, Charles Oppenheim, and Steve Probets, “RoMEO Studies 1: the impact of copyright ownership on academic author self-archiving,” Journal of Documentation 59, no. 3 (2003): 243–277,
http://eprints.rclis.org/5830/ (accessed 19 July 2021). DOI: 10.1108/00220410310698239 - 21cOAlition S, “Plan S Rights Retention Strategy.”
- 22Hinchliffe, “Explaining the Rights Retention Strategy.”
- 23“Code de la propriété intellectuelle: Titre III: Exploitation des droits (Articles L131-1 à L137-4)”, Légifrance,
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000006069414/LEGISCTA000006146350/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 24Mathilde Pavis, “Paris tribunal guts Twitter’s T&Cs… including the copyright clause for user-generated content,” The IPKat (blog), September 26, 2018,
https://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2018/09/paris-tribunal-guts-twitters-t.html (accessed 19 July 2021). - 25Stevan Harnad, “Worldwide Open Access: UK Leadership?,” Insights, 26, no. 1 (2013): 14–21, DOI: 10.1629/2048-7754.26.1.14 (accessed 19 July 2021).
- 26Ruth Kitchin Tillman, “Where Are We Now? Survey on Rates of Faculty Self-Deposit in Institutional Repositories,” Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication 5, no. 1 (2017):
eP2203 , DOI: 10.7710/2162-3309.2203 (accessed 19 July 2021). - 27Jill Emery, “How Green Is Our Valley?: Five-year Study of Selected LIS Journals from Taylor & Francis for Green Deposit of Articles,” Insights 31, no. 1 (2018): 23, DOI: 10.1629/uksg.406 (accessed 19 July 2021).
- 28Shaun Yon-Seng Khoo and Belinda Po Pyn Lay, “A very long embargo: Journal choice reveals active non-compliance with funder open access policies by Australian and Canadian neuroscientists,” LIBER Quarterly 28, no. 1 (2018): 1–19, DOI: 10.18352/lq.10252 (accessed 21 July 2021).
- 29“The Rights Retention Strategy and publisher equivocation: an open letter to researchers,” cOAlition S,
https://www.coalition-s.org/the-rrs-and-publisher-equivocation-an-open-letter-to-researchers/ (accessed 19 July 2021). - 30cOAlition S, “The Rights Retention Strategy and publisher equivocation.”
- 31“Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License,” Creative Commons,
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode/ (accessed 20 July 2021). - 32Axel Metzger and Stefan Hennigs,
“General Report,” in Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and other Alternative License Models, ed. Axel Metzger (Cham: Springer, 2016), 3–48, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-21560-0_1 (accessed 20 July 2021). - 33Peter B. Maggs,
“The Uncertain Legal Status of Free and Open Source Software in the United States,” in Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and other Alternative License Models, ed. Axel Metzger (Cham: Springer, 2016), 477–493, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-21560-0_25 (accessed 20 July 2021). - 34Andrés Guadamuz-González, “The license/contract dichotomy in open licenses: a comparative analysis,” University of La Verne Law Review 30, no. 2 (2009): 101–116,
https://core.ac.uk/display/16413885 (accessed 20 July 2021). - 35Melody Herr, “The interpretation of Creative Commons licenses by US federal courts,” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 47, no. 1 (2021): 102227, DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102227 (accessed 20 July 2021).
- 36Melanie Dulong de Rosnay, Creative Commons licenses legal pitfalls: Incompatibilities and solutions, last modified October 23, 2020,
https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00671622 (accessed 20 July 2021). - 37de Rosnay, Creative Commons.
- 38cOAlition S, “The Rights Retention Strategy and publisher equivocation.”
- 39Hinchliffe, “Explaining the Rights Retention Strategy.”
- 40“Frequently asked questions: What if I change my mind about using a CC license?,” Creative Commons,
https://creativecommons.org/faq/#what-if-i-change-my-mind-about-using-a-cc-license (accessed 20 July 2021). - 41Creative Commons, “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License.”
- 42cOAlition S, “The Rights Retention Strategy and publisher equivocation.”
- 43Diana Kwon, “Major publishers file second lawsuit against ResearchGate,” The Scientist, October 9, 2018,
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/major-publishers-file-second-lawsuit-against-researchgate-64916 (accessed 20 July 2021). - 44“Marking/Creators/Marking third party content,” Creative Commons Wiki, last modified November 19, 2013,
https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Marking/Creators/Marking_third_party_content (accessed 20 July 2021). - 45Yi Ding, “Is Creative Commons a panacea for managing digital humanities intellectual property rights?,” Information and Technology Libraries 38, no. 3 (2019): 34–48, DOI: 10.6017/ital.v38i3.10714 (accessed 20 July 2021).
- 46cOAlition S, “The Rights Retention Strategy and publisher equivocation.”
- 47
“Open access policy” , National Health and Medical Research Council,https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/resources/open-access-policy (accessed 20 July 2021). - 48
“NHMRC Open access policy draft for consultation (April 2021),” National Health and Medical Research Council,https://web.archive.org/web/20210503191442/https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/attachments/nhmrc_open_access_policy-consultation_draft.pdf (accessed 20 July 2021). - 49
“Open access policy – Further guidance draft for consultation (April 2021),” National Health and Medical Research Council,https://web.archive.org/web/20210505132248/https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/attachments/nhmrc_open_access_policy-further_guidance-consultation_draft.pdf (accessed 20 July 2021). - 50Rick Anderson, “cOAlition S’s Rights Confiscation Strategy Continues,” The Scholarly Kitchen (blog), July 20, 2020,
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2020/07/20/coalition-ss-rights-confiscation-strategy-continues/ (accessed 20 July 2021). - 51Timothy K. Armstrong, “Shrinking the Commons: Termination of Copyright Licenses and Transfers for the Benefit of the Public,” Harvard Journal on Legislation 47, no. 2 (2010): 359–423,
https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/fac_pubs/144 (accessed 20 July 2021). - 52Alexandra Giannopoulou, “The Creative Commons licenses through moral rights provisions in French law,” International Review of Law, Computers & Technology 28, no. 1 (2014): 60–80, DOI: 10.1080/13600869.2013.869923 (accessed 20 July 2021).