“The Digital Scholarship Librarian leads the planning, coordination, analysis and implementation of new service models that focus on the provision of scholarly communication services for the College of William & Mary community.

“Prestigious nonprofit science organization [American Physical Society] seeks a Publisher to lead business growth….The Publisher will serve as a member of the executive team, reporting to the CEO. The Publisher is responsible for developing and managing publishing strategy, new product and business development, marketing, sales, and publishing services….Key Responsibilities: …Representation of the organization in the scholarly publishing industry, and monitoring and advising the organization on shifts in publishing policies and practices globally on, for example, open access….”

“Alvin is a repository system for [1] cataloguing and searching of cultural heritage collections, and [2] archiving and dissemination of digital content….”

“A project to coordinate implementing a system to signal whether references cited on Wikipedia are free to reuse.”

“The publisher, Elsevier, has told universities that have built their own online repositories of journal articles written by their researchers that they now must respect waiting periods typically lasting a year or two before allowing free access to Elsevier-owned content.

“The Open Library of Humanities is extremely pleased to announce that the Journal of British and Irish Innovative Poetry will be the first subscription journal to move to the completely open-access model offered by the OLH. The journal, previously published by Gylphi, centres on the poetic writings that have appeared in Britain and Ireland since the late 1950s under various categorizations, for example: avant-garde, underground, linguistically innovative, second-wave Modernist, non-mainstream, the British Poetry Revival, the parallel tradition, formally innovative, neo-modernist and experimental, while also including the Cambridge School, the London School, concrete poetry, and performance writing.

The Open Library of Humanities is an Andrew W. Mellon Foundation-funded gold open-access publication platform. Unlike many gold open-access publishers, however, the OLH has no author-facing charges and is instead funded by an international consortium of libraries through the Library Partnership Subsidies model. The platform is open to existing journals who wish to move to a sustainable gold open-access publication mode. This includes journals currently operating on article processing charges, on an unsustainable volunteerist basis, and subscription publications….”

“As an Associate Managing Editor-Open Access, you will be the leader of an Open Access-focused team within Wiley’s Peer Review Management (PRM) team, and will have 2-3 direct reports. The ideal candidate will be detail-oriented and have interest in product development. The successful candidate will play a crucial role in guiding the development of the operation of Wiley’s growing Open Access program through driving workflow efficiency….”

“Could we take all the funds spent globally on scientific journal subscriptions by academic libraries, research centers and others, and transition them, or re-purpose them to pay for publishing those same journals and articles in open access? This would achieve a dream of the Open Access movement, and for society as a whole. Access to all published knowledge resulting from scientific research would no longer be restricted, anywhere in the world, by any form of barrier such as a paywall! The public good would be upheld. With no additional investments.

A recent and very interesting study1 by the Max Plank Digital Library, published as a White Paper on Open Access Policy, looks at precisely this scenario. It quantifies, for what appears to be the first time ever, if such a dream is possible and concludes that it is indeed! …”

“Just over a year ago Cultural Anthropology went Open Access. It has been an exhilarating experience, which has seen the journal engage new publics and conversations, as well as explore new intellectual and editorial possibilities. For those involved in the running of the journal, it has also demanded a steep learning curve. We, the Board of the Society for Cultural Anthropology, thought it would be a good idea to put down in writing some of these lessons whilst responding to a recent memorandum (5/4/15) to Section Presidents, Journal Editors, and Section Treasurers that recapitulates the AAA’s history of scholarly publishing. As we write, Michael Chibnik (AA’s Editor-in-Chief) has published an editorial expressing his hesitation towards an OA solution for American Anthropologist.1 We take this opportunity to reply to Chibnik’s text too….”

“The Journal of Hymenoptera Research (JHR) is published by the International Society of Hymenopterists. It is devoted to the study of all aspects of Hymenoptera and covers a broad range of research disciplines, including biology, morphology, behaviour, ecology, genetics, systematics and taxonomy. The journal was launched in 1992 and for most of its existence was published as two issues per annual volume. In 2011, after publication of 19 volumes, the Society decided to move from restricted to open access, with Pensoft as a publisher. This move had several important consequences for the publication and dissemination of information about Hymenoptera….”

“The Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences released its open access policy on April 1, 2015.

http://www.ideas-idees.ca/issues/open-access-aspp

The official title is ‘Open Access and the Awards to Scholarly Publications Program (ASPP)’.

The policy is about facilitating and promoting open access books (monographs): [1] the Federation will embrace the roles of promoter and facilitator of Open Access publishing projects for monographs, with a particular view to engage those that could include ASPP-funded books. [2] To encourage innovation and experimentation, the Federation will use its resources and networks to facilitate the participation of Canadian publishers, libraries and authors in promising, scalable projects that provide practical (i.e. financial or in-kind) support for Open Access monograph publishing. [3] To support the ongoing efforts of some Canadian publishers, the Federation will promote existing and future ASPP-funded Open Access books.

As I understand it, it is not a mandatory policy, it’s more about doing projects to support open access, in particular projects that would: [1] Make books Open Access immediately upon publication (no embargo) as DRM-free PDFs or full- text HTML, using the final published work as the version of record; [2] Track and report on downloads and/or usage; [3] Use Creative Commons licences; [4] Host Open Access publications in at least one recognized repository that provides permanent links; [5] Follow accepted protocols for metadata.

above from full policy http://www.ideas-idees.ca/sites/default/files/oa-aspp-policy-position-en.pdf …”

“Open Access is catalyzing reform on the business side of the scholarly-communication system. Will Open Access be enough to push universities into experimentation on the scholarly side? That is an Open question.“

“…a few more of the howlers that keep making Elsevier’s unending series of arbitrary contractual bug-fixes logically incoherent (i.e., self-contradictory) and technically nonsensical, hence moot, unenforceable, and eminently ignorable for anyone who takes a few moments to think instead of cringe. Elsevier is trying to use pseudo-legal words to squeeze the virtual genie (the Web) back into the physical bottle (the old, land-based, print-on-paper world):…”

“The Open Data Story Producer will work closely with teams across the Evidence Programme and the organisation as a whole, with particularly close connections to the Research, Communications and Production teams.

Typically, our projects involve some or all of the following: research, data analysis, technical build, content production (websites, data visualisation, reports), communication and evaluation. Collectively we call these outputs ‘stories’, and are now looking for someone to manage the end-to-end process of creating them.”

“Nosek thinks that peer review might sometimes actively hinder clear and swift testing of scientific claims. He points out that, when in 2011 a team of physicists in Italy reported evidence of neutrinos that apparently moved faster than light (in violation of Einstein’s theory of special relativity), this astonishing claim was made,4 examined, and refuted5, 6 very quickly thanks to high-energy physicists’ efficient system of distributing preprints of papers through an open-access repository. If that testing had relied on the usual peer-reviewed channels, it could have taken years….Ultimately, Nosek has his eyes on a “scientific utopia,” in which science becomes a much more efficient means of knowledge accumulation. Nobody claims that OSF will be the panacea that gets us there, however. As Oransky says, “One of the larger issues is getting scientists to stop fooling themselves. This requires elimination of motivated reasoning and confirmation bias, and I haven’t seen any good solutions for that.” So along with OSF, Nosek believes the necessary restructuring includes open-access publication, and open and continuous peer review….”