More Related Content
Similar to A Digitalization Partnership: Sharing human and material resources by Larissa Smirnova & Régine Fabri (20)
A Digitalization Partnership: Sharing human and material resources by Larissa Smirnova & Régine Fabri
- 1. A digitalization partnership: Sharing human and material resources
- 2. A digitalization partnership: Sharing resources by Régine Fabri (NBGB) IPR policy by Larissa Smirnova (RMCA)
- 3. NBGB is a centre of excellence for research and documentation on tropical and European botany RBINS houses a diverse and exceptionally rich zoological collection covering the Europe and other geographical regions RMCA is a leading research institute and knowledge centre on the biodiversity of Central Africa Be-TAF (Belgian center for TAxonomic Facilities): informal agreement between RMCA – RBINS – NBGB
- 4. Relations inside Be-TAF Focuses on European (Belgian) and tropical botany Covers Europe and other geographical regions in the field of zoology and paleontology Focuses on zoology in the afro-tropical region Common journal for zoological and botanical taxonomy, collection management and good practices in taxonomic and curatorial research publications authors (De Witte, Frechkop, Poll, De Wildeman...) publications authors publications authors
- 5. ABC Taxa • Common documentation • Common wiki • Sharing resources (servers, scanners) • Common IPR policy
- 6. Relations between BHL-Europe and other projects <-> BHL: collaboration of digital libraries with creation of Global BHL as target <-> Sterna: enriching of digital resources on birds by linking to important ornithological publications <-> Exhibition “Lemaire”: an example of intra-institutional collaboration (human and biological sciences) <-> EUROPEANA: the content of BHL-Eu will be accessible via Europeana <-> EUROPEANA, BioCASE, TDWG, CETAF and GBIF: inter-project cooperation in the domain of technology (free and open access to biodiversity data online)
- 7. Relations between BHL-Europe and other projects: other possible relations <-> API & LAPI: an international initiative building an online digital library of scholarly resources from and about Africa and Latin America <-> LLUC: an online union catalogue of Linnaean material from institutions worldwide
- 8. A digitalization partnership: IPR policy by Larissa Smirnova (RMCA)
- 9. IPR Best Practice Guide (BHL-Europe) briefly: • Open access* (Creative Commons) to a wide spectrum of end-users: Free of charge accessibility and re-use: - PD - open access without restrictions - Work protected by copyright – non-commercial re-use • Share with other projects (BHL, EOL, Europeana etc.) • Partners do not assert rights in the digital version of an out of copyright work • Partners are responsible for providing content and data to the project that do not infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties * According to the Association of Research Libraries, open access is "an alternative to the traditional subscription-based publishing model made possible by new digital technologies and networked communications". Open access means that full-text scientific papers are available online as soon as they are published, free of charge and most restrictions on access or use.
- 10. Risk Management Three groups of risk: 1. Low risk material: published before 1860 2. Medium risk material: published 1861-1910 3. High risk material: published post-1910 Case of RMCA! Rights clearance is important! - Determine copyright duration - Find rights owners (forget not third party content!) - Apply for permission - Keep records (due diligence)
- 11. Anderson John-> 1. search (internet, local databases etc.) 2. Scottish zoologist (4/10/1833 – 15/08/1900) 3. PD -> safe to put online Louette Michel -> 1. Still working for RMCA 2. Published by RMCA 3. If RMCA has copyrights -> automatic OK for BHL-Eu 4. If author has copyrights -> ask permission for online publication. 5. Embedded third-party content (photo’s, illustrations) -> search copyrights owners and ask permission.
- 12. Schouteden Henry 1. 1881-1972 -> NOT PD 2. Was working for RMCA 3. Published by RMCA 4. We consider it as copyrights RMCA 5. Point at issue -> big amount of embedded material (photo’s, illustrations)
- 13. Table of photographers and drawers who granted material to the author. almost safe safe worth to search 7 volumes with ~3000 pages Total of ~750 images More then 50 names
- 14. Model agreement We have two types of letters: Letter from Be-TAF for copyrights assignment BHL-Europe pro forma agreement for rights owners “Assigns the totality of its ownership of copyright on works, without any reserve, in exclusivity to the institution which was the initial publisher of the works. “ “Nothing in this Agreement is intended to transfer any rights ownership interest in the Licensed Material; To the extent that Licensor owns all rights, including copyright, in the Licensed Material, Licensor will continue to own any and all such rights.”
- 15. Risk band and licensing guide
- 16. “Work for hire”
- 17. “Work for hire” The 1976 Copyright Act defined a work made for hire, as follows: a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered as work for hire. and the Act reads: Works created by employees of the U.S. government as part of their duties are inherently in the public domain, free for use by anyone and therefore not to be copyrighted… http://www.ladas.com/Patents/Computer/CopyrightFundamentals.html
- 18. Some controversial points: Example 1: Sclater, William Lutley, (1863 - 1944). British zoologist. Author is not yet in PD. But a lot of his publications are already in BHL-US (published before 1922). Do we have moral rights to put online more of his publications?
- 19. Example 2: Meyrick Edward (1854-1938). British entomologist. Author is more than 70 years dead – PD! But in BHL-US only two volumes are available, because three other volumes were published after 1922.
- 20. Example 3: Schouteden Henry (1881-1972). Belgian zoologist. Author is not yet in PD according to EU legislation but earlier works are already online in BHL-US (PD according to US copyright law).
- 21. http://scienceblogs.com/interactions/2007/05/copyright_and_scientific_paper_1.php “We absolutely shouldWe absolutely shouldWe absolutely shouldWe absolutely should notnotnotnot have, nor should journals have, any sort of exclusive right tohave, nor should journals have, any sort of exclusive right tohave, nor should journals have, any sort of exclusive right tohave, nor should journals have, any sort of exclusive right to preventpreventpreventprevent reuse of our papers. But we do need credit and citation.reuse of our papers. But we do need credit and citation.reuse of our papers. But we do need credit and citation.reuse of our papers. But we do need credit and citation. I wouldn't proposal any sorts of laws for this. Indeed, putting all scientific papers in the public domain would be fine. Leave the requirement for citation as a matter of professional ethics. Universities, labs, and scientific societies take such professional ethics very seriously, and that' s enough enforcement; we don't need laws…” (Rob Knop, PhD in Physics ) http://www.genethik.de/copyright.htm “The goals and motivations of scientists writing up their research are very different from those of professional authors, although they may be the same people in different settings. The scientistThe scientistThe scientistThe scientist is concerned with sharing new findings, advancing research inquiis concerned with sharing new findings, advancing research inquiis concerned with sharing new findings, advancing research inquiis concerned with sharing new findings, advancing research inquiry, and influencing the thinking ofry, and influencing the thinking ofry, and influencing the thinking ofry, and influencing the thinking of others.others.others.others. The benefits the scientist receives from publication are indirect; rarely is there direct remuneration for scientific articles. Indeed, scientists frequently pay page charges to publish their articles in journals. The world of the directly paid author is very different. There, the need for close protection of intellectual property follows directly from the need to protect income, making natural allies of the publisher and the professional author, whether a novelist or the author of a chemistry text. Thus, the goals and motivations of the publishing research scientist are consonant with the purpose of Section 105 of the U.S. Copyright Act and with federal funding of basic research. Serving the public good, which is why publicly funded research iServing the public good, which is why publicly funded research iServing the public good, which is why publicly funded research iServing the public good, which is why publicly funded research is supported, is possible only ifs supported, is possible only ifs supported, is possible only ifs supported, is possible only if research results are widely disseminated.research results are widely disseminated.research results are widely disseminated.research results are widely disseminated.” (Steven Bachrach, R. and others “Who Should Own Scientific Papers? Science Magazine, 281/98, page 1459) Stodden, V. Harvard Univ., Cambridge, MA The Legal Framework for Reproducible Scientific Research: Licensing and Copyright :::: • Evidence exists that reproducible research receives more citations thanreproducible research receives more citations thanreproducible research receives more citations thanreproducible research receives more citations than nonreproduciblenonreproduciblenonreproduciblenonreproducible workworkworkwork, and releasing research on the Web is a growing trend that seems to be gathering institutional support. • The authors of scientific works based on governmentThe authors of scientific works based on governmentThe authors of scientific works based on governmentThe authors of scientific works based on government----supported research should be free tosupported research should be free tosupported research should be free tosupported research should be free to distribute those works as they see fitdistribute those works as they see fitdistribute those works as they see fitdistribute those works as they see fit, via journals, electronic postings, and other new modes that may appear. What scientists think about the copyrights (some citations from Internet): …We absolutely should not have, nor should journals have, any sort of exclusive right to prevent reuse of our papers. But we do need credit and citation… …The scientist is concerned with sharing new findings, advancing research inquiry, and influencing the thinking of others… …reproducible research receives more citations than nonreproducible work… The authors of scientific works based on government- supported research should be free to distribute those works as they see fit… …Serving the public good, which is why publicly funded research is supported, is possible only if research results are widely disseminated…
- 22. Conclusions • Although all efforts have been made to ensure that material that infringes the law will not be present in content provided to BHL-Europe, the risk cannot be entirely eliminated. • A variety of measures should be taken to minimise and manage risk including the publication and implementation of a 'notice and takedown' policy. • The 'notice and takedown' policy will be published prominently on the BHL-Europe portal and service. It will provide clear instructions on how to make a complaint.