日本語訳は、一部意訳を含みます。
正確性の観点からは、原文をご確認下さい。

The benefits of Author’s Rights
Retention for Researchers,
Universities and beyond
論文著者の権利保持が
即時OA と英国大学研究者の利にどのように繋がるかJapanese Open Science Summit (JOSS)
20th June 2024
Sally Rumsey | cOAlition S Ambassador
サリー・ラムゼイ

cOAlition Sアンバサダー

Hello and thank you for inviting me to join this meeting1

I’m going to start by taking a look at cOAlition S andPlan S

cOAlition S is a group of 28 research funders,charitable foundations, and others, from acrossEurope, the US, and beyond. As a group it’s estimatedto provide in the region of 35 billion Euros per annum
in research funds, resulting in around 150,000
published articles each year

Plan S is not a policy. It is a set of 10 principles, uponwhich cOAlition S funders have agreed to align theirpolicies.

Plan S is built on a strong principle that all scholarly
publications resulting from funding by cOAlition S
organisations, must be made immediately available,
without embargo, under a CC BY licence.

There are three equally valid routes to compliance:
Publication in a fully Open Access venue; Open
Access publication in a subscription journal with an
OA option (known as hybrid Open Access) under atransformative agreement; or publication in a
subscription journal and the Version of Record or
Author Accepted Manuscript made immediately
available in a repository.

ハイブリッドOA（購読誌におけるOAオプション）

Hybrid OA (OA option in subscription journal)• cOAlition S strong position on hybrid OA• See “Why hybrid journals do not lead to full and immediate Open Access”•

https://www.coalition-s.org/why-hybrid-journals-do-not-lead-to-full-and-immediate-open-access/

cOAlition SのハイブリッドOAに対する強い姿勢

・「ハイブリッド誌がなぜフルOAや即時OAに繋がらないか」参照• APCs (Article Processing Charges) for publication in hybrid
journals are not financially supported by cOAlition S
funders unless the journal is part of a transformative
arrangement ハイブリッド誌におけるAPCは、当該誌が転換

BUT…….

契約下にない限り、cOAlition S助成機関に助成されない。

• cOAlition S confirms the end of its financial support for Open
Access publishing under transformative arrangements after2024•

https://www.coalition-s.org/coalition-s-confirms-the-end-of-its-financial-support-for-open-access-publishing-under-transformative-arrangements-after-2024/

しかし、cOAlition Sは2024年以降、転換契約下にあるOA出版に対する助成についても支援しないことを発表した。

The funders will not currently financially support
Article Processing Charges or APCs for OA publicationin hybrid journals, unless the journal is part of atransformative arrangement. Because of the
problems of a hybrid OA model, and recognizing therisk that transformative arrangements may not in fact
be transformative, cOAlition S funders have confirmed
they will not offer financial support for OA publishingunder transformative arrangements after 2024.

7

Now let’s take a look at copyright and licensing

研究者が自身の研究成果を扱う権利：現状

Authors’ right to use their own work: How things stand
Licence to Publish (LTP) written by publisher - Imbalance• The publisher does not need the authors’ rights to publish the paper – only needs a LTP• Authors’ terms of use of their own intellectual creation written by publisher• Publisher’s business model takes priority over scholarship• Business model unnecessarily conflated with author’s rights
出版社が出版ライセンスを作文しており、権利を多く確保しすぎている。
たとえば、著作権譲渡は不要なのでは？初出版権で十分。
出版社のビジネスモデルが不当に著者の権利を侵害している。

Conflating ‘value added service’ with ‘author rights’ creates risk
• Some publishers conflate paid value added service with content ownership• Risk of service provider control shifting upstream as new dissemination models emerge
出版社の付加価値サービスと、著者の権利が混合されると、リスクが生じる
たとえば、一部の出版社は有料の付加価値サービスと、コンテンツへの所有権の必要性を混同している。
これは、新しい研究発信モデルが生まれるたびに、サービスプロバイダの支配が上流に移るリスクを生む

Unhelpful permissions restrict author’s dissemination. Eg:• Allowing access via personal web but not repository• Restrictions on use of Academic Research Networks (eg ResearchGate; Academia.edu)• Embargoes. Claim of risk to sustainability without embargo – or not [See Elsevier Share Links: The
Schrödinger’s cat of Open Access]出版社からの意味不明な許可により、著者の研究発信が制限される
たとえば、リポジトリやResearchGateは不可であるが、個人HPにおける掲載は許可されている。

Repository services are not being fully exploited• Repositories not maximizing dissemination potential for researchers & universities• Too much time spent on OA policy compliance rather than scholarship
リポジトリの可能性が十分に発揮できていない。出版社のOAポリシーの確認に時間を取り過ぎている。

Publishing terms designed for 20th not 21st century research dissemination
出版条件が21世紀ではなく、20世紀の研究発信のものになっている。

Here’s a summary of the position when authors submit their manuscripts to
many publishers.
a.

Firstly, a publisher does not need the authors’ rights in order topublish the paper – they only need a Licence to Publish (LTP) from theauthor. The licence to publish that a typical author signs tends to be
written by the publisher, even though it is the author licensing the
publisher to publish their work. This imbalance means the
publisher’s business model takes precedence over scholarship, andis conflated with the author’s rights. Conflating the publisher’s valueadded service with content ownership means that there is a futurerisk this same model could be adopted further upstream the research
process to other output types such as preprints, micro-publications,and so on.

b.

It comes down to who controls the content, that is, the author’s
intellectual creation. If it is clear that the author retains control of
their rights, and that is non-negotiable, then discussions aboutpublication can proceed without argument.

9c.

There are lots of examples of publishers imposing unhelpful terms on
authors such as allowing immediate Open Access via a personal
website, but not in a repository. Saying it’s OK to distribute via one
freely available website, but not another totally ignores the way theinternet works, and just adds to researcher’s confusion.

d.

Another confusing restriction is that on the rules for dissemination via
Academic Research Networks such as ResearchGate andAcademia.edu.

e.

There is also the questionable claim that embargoes for the AcceptedManuscript are necessary – which is contradicted by some publishers
who at the same time promote unembargoed access to paywalled
articles via tools such as ShareLink and SharedIt. I direct you to mypiece on the cOAlition S blog: Elsevier Share Links: The Schrödinger’s
cat of Open Access as well as a piece I wrote on Springer Nature
ShareIt and one about Springer Nature sharing terms. I’ll make thelinks available later in the chat.
i. https://www.coalition-s.org/blog/we-encourage-you-to-shareyour-article-widely-but-not-too-much/ii.

https://www.coalition-s.org/blog/springer-naturedoublespeak/iii. https://www.coalition-s.org/blog/elsevier-share-links-theschrodingers-cat-of-open-access/f.

As a result of all this, repositories are not fully exploited to maximise
dissemination for researchers and universities. And because of the
convoluted permissions that result in complex terms, too much timeand money is spent on policy compliance rather than actual
dissemination. To sum up, the model used in most current situations
is designed for 20th, not 21st century research dissemination.

9

Part 2
Plan S Rights Retention Strategy
What it is and why it was adopted
Plan S権利保持戦略とは何か？
また、なぜ推進されることとなったか？

Now let’s take a look at the Plan S Rights Retention
Strategy.

10権利保持戦略の目的

Rights Retention Strategy (RRS): Objectives•

Main objective:
All research funded by cOAlition S organisations is OA with zero embargo +CC BY licence
cOAlition Sの助成を得た研究はcc-byライセンス付き、エンバーゴなしでOAにしなければいけない（というcOAlitioni Sの目的を可能とするため）•

Empower researchers working with a cOAlition S funder to retain
sufficient intellectual property rights to their Author Accepted Manuscript(AAM)
cOAlition S下の研究者が、自身の著者最終稿の知的財産を•

Global access:
Authors, who own the rights to their AAM, share it in a repository.

十分に留保できるようにするため•

著者最終稿への権利を留保できた著者が、当該原稿をリポジトリに共有することを通じて、グローバルなアクセスを確保するため

Simplicity:
Cut through the complexity of journal ‘permissions’ no embargoes. The
CC BY licence on the AAM allows authors to share the AAM in a repository,
and to freely reuse their own material as they see fit
ゼロ・エンバーゴについて雑誌の許可を得るといった煩雑さを回避するため
著者最終稿にcc-byライセンスがあることによって、論文著者は著者最終稿をリポジトリに共有でき、また、自身の資料を自由に利活用できるようになる。

The main objective of the strategy is that all research
funded by cOAlition S organisations is OA (Open
Access), with zero embargo, with a CC BY licence. The
strategy aims to empower researchers to retain
sufficient intellectual property rights to the Author
Accepted Manuscript so that they can share it
globally in a repository and elsewhere. It aims to cut
through the complexity of journal permissions &embargoes, allowing authors freedom to choose how
they share their work.

11権利保持戦略：著者がしなければならないこと

1

Rights Retention Strategy (RRS)
What authors need to do

1. To inform the publisher that they are using the RRS, cOAlition S funded
researchers should include the following templated language in theirsubmissions: 投稿した論文が権利保持戦略下にあることを出版社に伝えるため、研究者は以下の文言を投稿論文に付す。

2“This research was funded, in whole or in part, by [Organisation
Name, Grant #]. A CC BY licence is applied to the AAM arising from thissubmission, in accordance with the grant’s open access conditions.”
この研究は、「助成名、No.＊＊」からの助成を全部/部分的に得ました。この助成のOA条件により、この投稿論文から派生する著者最終稿にはcc-byライセンスが付されます。

2. On publication: make AAM open access in a repository
論文著者は、論文出版時に、著者最終稿をリポジトリにOAにする。

3

3. Contact their funder (or library) in case of disagreementwith or obfuscation by the publisher
出版社と対立あるいは、困惑状態となった場合は、助成機関（あるいは、図書館）に連絡をする。

cOAlition S informed > 150 publishers of the RRS prior to its adoption
cOAlition Sは、権利保持戦略を採択する前に、150以上の出版社に連絡をした。

It’s designed to be simple for authors, who simply
need to include template text in their submission, andthen make their Accepted Manuscript open access ina repository. If there are any disagreements with their
publisher, they can contact their funder (or theirlibrary)

12

Some challenges 課題• Author rights retention (RR) challenged by some publishers – using contract law
rather than copyright law 権利保持戦略は、出版社により、著作権法ではなく契約法により、挑戦を受けている。

• Some publishers have adopted unhelpful workflows to try to counter author RR• Confuses researchers• Authors not informed by journal about options until acceptance• Authors may sign conflicting contract (Journal + Uni Funder Grant agreement)• Authors may be invoiced for APCs they can’t pay
いくつかの出版社は、著者の権利保持に対抗するため、わかりにくいワークフローを導入している。
著者の混乱、採択まで多様な選択肢についての情報不足、矛盾する契約、負担不能なAPC• cOAlition S RRS only applies to funded authors within an institution

cOAlition Sの権利保持戦略は、研究助成を受けた、機関に所属する研究者にしか適用されない。

Despite this…
• lots of papers have been made OA using the Plan S RR wording• Authors fears around desk rejection have not been realised

https://pixabay.com/photos/puzzle-pieces-puzzle-game-592781/

これらにもかかわらず、- 多くの論文が、Plan Sの権利保持の文言を用いてOAとなり、- 査読前に拒絶されるのではないかという著者の恐れは、現実のものとなっていない。

Unfortunately, some publishers have challenged author
rights retention. They have done this via contract law rather
than copyright law. Some publishers have adopted unhelpful
workflows to try to counter author rights retention, which
confuses researchers. It can mean authors are not informedby the journal about their options until acceptance, may
result in conflicting contracts, or that authors are invoiced
for APCs they can’t pay. Additionally, rights retention only
applies to funded authors within an institution. However,despite this, lots of papers have been made OA using the RR
wording, and authors fears around desk rejection have notbeen realized.

13

Part 4
Institutional Rights Retention
Policies
The case of the UK and beyond
機関の権利保持ポリシー
英国の事例ほか

Fortunately, simpler and even more effective
solutions are being adopted in universities across the
UK and beyond.

14

機関の権利保持ポリシー

Institutional Rights Retention Policies (IRRP)• cOAlition S Rights Retention Strategy• Limited to funded authors• Funders: No ‘skin’ in the Author-Publisher publishing contract• Provided impetus for institutions to adopt their own policies
cOAlition Sの権利保持戦略- 研究助成を得た研究者のみ対象- 研究助成機関は、著者と出版社の出版契約に介入できない- 機関が自身のポリシーを採択する原動力となる• IRRPs are stronger than funders’ policies• Applies to all researchers – funded or not• Direct link with author via employment contract/signatory offunding agreement• Prior licence may form part of employment contract – if challenged:

claim of procurement of breach of contract or similar
機関の権利保持ポリシーは、研究助成機関のポリシーより強い- 研究助成を受けていない研究者も含め、全研究者対象- 雇用契約を通じ、論文著者と直接に関係- 事前ライセンスを雇用契約の一部とすることにより、出版社等から告訴された際、契約違反を主張できる

https://pixabay.com/illustrations/silhouettes-person-circle-1186990/

Although the cOAlition S Rights Retention Strategy has limits- it is limited to funded authors, and the funder has no legal
place in the author-publisher relationship – it has proved to
be an impetus for universities to adopt their own, stronger,
rights retention policies. University policies apply to all
researchers, funded or not. There is a direct link via theresearcher’s employment contract with the author. And mostimportantly, the prior licence that is agreed between
researcher & university may form part of an employment
contract. The prior licence means that if, challenged, theuniversity could claim procurement of breach of contract orsimilar.

15

英国機関の権利保持ポリシー

UK Institutional Rights Retention Policies• Rapid progress 迅速な拡大• > 28 UK institutions adopted institutionalrights retention policies in just over 2 years•(at 3 June 2024)

２年に28以上の英国機関が採択（2024.6.3現在）• Many more in the pipeline

更に多くの機関が準備中• Visualisation with links to policies• Prof Stephen J. Eglen, University ofCambridge• https://sje30.github.io/rrs/rrs.html← ケンブリッジ大学Stephen J. Eglen教授による権利保持ポリシー採択機関のマッピング

Since 2021 there has been rapid adoption of suchinstitutional rights retention policies in the UK. It now
stands at 28 adopted policies with many more in thepipeline. Please take a look at Prof Stephen Eglen’s
excellent visualisation.

16

英国大学の一般的な機関の権利保持ポリシー

Typical (UK) Institutional Rights Retention Policy (IRRP)• Confirms members of staff own the copyright (not the institution)

Prior licensing
means the work is‘licensed’ to theuniversity even
before it’s written
事前ライセンスとは、論文が執筆されるよ
り前から、当該成果物が大学にライセン
スされているということ。

機関は、機関の教職員が、自身の著作権を留保することを保証する（著作権は機関に帰属する訳ではない）• Researcher automatically grants the institution a non-exclusive licence tomake their manuscripts publicly available under a CC BY licence as a conditionof employment 研究者は雇用条件の一環として、CC BY ライセンスに基づいて原稿を公開するための非独占的ライセンスを機関に自動的に与える。

• Researcher provides the institution with an Author Accepted Manuscript (AAM)
copy of the work (usually via the library)
研究者は機関に対し、著者最終稿のコピーを提供する。
（一般的には図書館に提供）• AAM (Author Accepted Manuscript) made Open Access (usually by the library
via the repository) 著者最終稿はOAとなる。
（一般的には図書館がリポジトリを通じて作業実施）• Covers research articles & conference papers, but may include other outputs
一般に、論文と学会発表資料を対象とするが、その他の成果物も含まれてよい。

A typical UK policy confirms that it is the member ofstaff that owns the copyright. The researcher
automatically grants the institution a non-exclusive
licence to make their manuscripts publicly available
under a CC BY licence as a condition of employment,
and provide the library with their accepted
manuscript to be made available via the repository.
Policies usually cover research articles andconference papers, but may include other item types.
The beauty of the prior licence is that, in effect, itmeans the work is licenced to the university before it’s
written.

17

ノルウェーにおける進展

Progress in Norway• Universities + research institutes
大学＋研究機関• 14 policies adopted• Since 2022
2022年以降、14ポリシー採択• “Institutional rights policy meansthat what is to be published must
be posted in open institutionalarchives. The researchers are free
to own, use, control and archive
their own research.” ** Via Google translate
機関の権利保持ポリシーでは、出版物をオープンな機関リポジトリに登録することを求める。研究者は自身の研究を所有・利用・コントロール・保存することができる。
https://www.openscience.no/aktuelt/institusjonellrettighetspolitikk-rrs-irrs-ved-norskeforskningsinstitusjoner

Progress in Norway has also been rapid. 14 policies
have been adopted since 2022 and the Norwegians
have taken a particularly robust approach.

18

機関の権利保持ポリシーの
世界の状況

Global status of
IRRPs• Globally numbers of policies
is increasing
ポリシー採択件数は、
世界的に拡大中• Growing Open AccessDirectory list of policies• Includes 60 in USA
一覧は、
米国60ポリシーを含む•

https://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/
University_rightsretention_OA_policies

Of course, institutional policies are not new. The first
was Harvard’s back in 2008 and since then, numbers
have been increasing including about 60 in the USA.
Take a look at the global list of policies

19

機関の権利保持ポリシーの恩恵

Lots of benefits of Institutional Rights Retention Policies
1.
2.

Simple to communicate, use, and understand
Authors can disseminate and use their own work as they choose•
Control of primary dissemination by author resides in academia
3. Researchers feel supported by their institution•
As part of employment contract: university, not researcher, counters any pushback
4. Increased researchers’ engagement with OA
5. Counters complexities of convoluted & conflicting rights policies for researchers & library staff – saving
time & therefore money•
Cuts through confused messaging from publishers
6. Researchers’ fears have not been realised re: editorial rejection; non-cooperative co-authors; whensigning publication agreements•
Little pushback from publishers (dissatisfaction but not rejection)
7. Opportunities to save time and money•
Strengthens institutional negotiating position with publishers•
Reduces repository time spent managing embargoes
8. Applies to all, not just funded, researchers
9. Increases open access to researcher’s & institution’s publications•
More OA via institutional repository & plugs gaps
10. Low numbers of opt-outs by researchers reported
11. Benefits researchers, research, institution, & society in general

https://pixabay.com/photos/biscuitcake-food-dessert-to-taste-4652694/

1. IRRPは、簡単に説明・利用・理解可能
2. 著者は自身の成果物を自分の望む方法で発信できる
3. 研究者は機関により、守られていると感じる。
4. 研究者のOA意識向上
5. 出版社が故意に設ける混乱を避け、時間とお金の節約となる。

大学教員の賛同と支援を得て採択
AdoptedIN support of, and
WITH the support ofuniversity academic
staff

6. IRRPによる、査読拒否等の出版社の対応は僅少
7. 時間とお金の節約（1. 出版社への交渉力拡大、
2. エンバーゴ期間確認の時間の節約）
8. 研究助成を受けた者だけでなく、全員対象
9. 機関と研究者のオープンな研究発信を促進
10. オプトアウトする研究者は少ない
11. 全般に、研究者、研究、機関、学会に資する。

There are lots of benefits to adopting an institutional rights retention policy. I’ve
listed many of them here, and you can read them at your leisure later. They include
that they are simple to communicate & understand. It gives authors control of theirown dissemination of their research findings. Importantly, researchers feel
supported by their institution. Adopting a rights retention policy can save theinstitution money for example, by simplifying repository processes, thereby saving
time. It can also save money by strengthening the institution’s negotiating position
for publisher deals.
a.

b.

If the institution has a valid alternative for making papers Open Access,it means the publisher’s offer can be much more fairly negotiated. For
example, negotiations could address limitations on researchers such asthat of Elsevier, who stipulate that authors can make only “some” use of
their own work only “if” their library has a subscription.
Ultimately, because of the increased open access to the papers, it
benefits individual researchers, the institution, and broader research &society in general. It means that keeping your rights as an author stillallows a publisher to provide publication services, but keeps control of
the author’s dissemination within academia, and this is rapidly
becoming the norm.

20

機関の権利保持ポリシーに関する私の経験

My experience of Rights Retention (RR) policies• Major publishers••

Some publishers don’t like RR policies but have no valid arguments
against authors retaining their rights
However, author RR is becoming the de facto norm at many
universities• Some publishers create procedures to make it difficult for
authors to retain their rights or they ‘encourage’ paid APC (Article
Processing Charge) option (eg ACS)
• Only one publisher has specifically said they will desk reject m/s
because of RR•

ASH: American Society of Hematology• Lots of examples of rights retention being used and m/s made OA– even when not ‘allowed’ by publisher• No repercussions I’m aware of•

Negative optics of publisher attempting to prosecute an academic ora university for retaining their own rights• Lots of researchers’ groups strongly support Plan S RRS•

GYA; YAE; EUA; Science Europe; EuroDoc; Marie Curie Alumni Assoc;
CESAER• 主要出版社•

一部の出版社は権利保持を好まないが、著者が原稿の権利を保持することに対して有効な反論ができていない•

一方で、多くの大学で著者の権利保持は一般的になりつつある• 一部の出版社は、複雑な手続きを設け、著者の権利保持を難しくする。あるいは、APCの負担を要求する。（ACSなど）• 権利保持の文言による査読拒否した出版社は、一社のみ（米国血液学会）• （出版社の許可なくとも）権利保持を利用し、原稿をOAとした事例あり。
• Plan S権利保持戦略を支持する研究者グループ多数•

GYA; YAE; EUA; Science Europe; EuroDoc; Marie
Curie Alumni Assoc; CESAER• Researchers and institutions are taking positive action to
support researchers• 研究者と機関は、研究者支援に前向きな行動を取っている。

• Universities increasingly reassuring researchers ‘we’ve got yourback’

• 多くの大学が、研究者に安心を保証するようになっている。

• Universities are collaborating to adopt policies•

Sharing resources, experience and expertise (eg N8, Midlands
Innovation, SCURL, GW4)

• ポリシー採択のために、大学間で協力•

リソース、経験、専門性の共有 (eg N8, Midlands
Innovation, SCURL, GW4)

Some publishers don’t like RR policies but have no valid arguments against
authors retaining their rights. However, author RR is becoming the norm at many
universities. Unfortunately, some publishers create procedures to make it
difficult for authors to retain their rights or they ‘encourage’ paid APC option. To
my knowledge, only one publisher has specifically said they will desk reject m/s
because of RR. There are lots of examples of rights retention being used and m/smade OA – even when not ‘allowed’ by publishers with no repercussions that I’maware of. Lots of researchers’ groups strongly support Plan S RRS including the
Global Young Academy, EuroDoc and CESAER. Researchers & institutions aretaking positive action to support researchers, and universities are increasingly
reassuring researchers ‘we’ve got your back.’ Universities are collaborating to
adopt policies by sharing resources, experience & expertise. Examples in the UK
include the N8 partnership, and SCURL in Scotland.

21

一部の出版社の権利保持に対する反論

Some Publishers’ arguments against Rights Retention
Claims*• Importance of the ‘Version of Record’• Gold OA is what authors want
• Green OA
•
•
•
•
•
•

Image:https://commons.wikime
dia.org/wiki/File:White_flag_wavi
ng.svg underhttps://creativecommons.org/lic
enses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en“undermines progress”
Potential problems with Green OA
Emphasis on green OA is not constructive
Risk of establishing green OA as the default
Green OA removes incentives for institutions to transition funding
towards gold OA
Green OA disincentivizes funders to establish structured funds tosupport OA• Authors rights retention erodes the advantages of full OA• “The RRS…gives authors the opportunity to selectsubscription journals and the subscription model at theexpense of full OA titles” i.e. prefer not to enable author
choice• RRS undermines publishers’ progress & commitment to
OA• Publishers produce high quality journals• Publishers add value• The Rights Retention Strategy ignores long-standing
academic freedoms• Sustainability: “[RRS] provides an immediate freesubstitute that eliminates the ability to charge for theservices that publishers provide.”•

Many of these claims can be refuted• これら主張の多くは、反論可能

主張*• 印刷版の重要性• 著者はゴールドOAを望む• グリーンOA•（OAの）進展を止める•

グリーンOAには根本的問題あり•

グリーンOAの強調は建設的ではない•

グリーンOAが一般的となるリスク•

グリーンOAにより、機関がゴールドOAを負担しなくなる•

グリーンOAにより、研究助成機関がOAを負担しなくなる• 著者の権利保持は、フルOAの利点をなくする• 権利保持戦略は、（フルOA誌の代償の下）、研究者に購読誌に出版する機会を与える。
• 権利保持戦略は、出版社のOAに向けての努力を無にする• 出版社は高品質の雑誌を出版している。
• 出版社は付加価値をもたらしている。
• 権利保持戦略は、「学問の自由」を無視する• 持続性：権利保持戦略は、無償でOAにする道を開くため、出版社が提供するサービスに対して課金する機会がなくなる。

https://www.oaspa.org/news/open-post-the-rise-of-immediate-green-oa-undermines-progress/ Publishers’ response to launch of Plan S Rights Retention Strategy posted on OASPA site
Dec 2020; https://www.springernature.com/gp/open-research/journals-books/journals/going-for-gold-reach-and-impact; https://group.springernature.com/gp/group/media/pressreleases/springer-nature-signs-joint-letter-with-50--other-publishers-/18828798

Some publishers have made arguments supposedly against author rights
retention. Their arguments include the importance of the version of record, andthat Gold Open Access is what authors want.
a. They list a number of points criticising green open access.
b. Many of their claims can be refuted. They claim that authors retaining
the rights to their own intellectual creation undermines publishers’commitment to Open Access. They even claim that availability of theaccepted manuscript stops them from charging for their services.
c. They note that publishers produce high quality journals and they add
value, which of course they do.
d. They also surprisingly claim that author rights retention somehow
ignores long-standing academic freedoms.

22出版社の主張の一部は正しいものの・・・

Even though some of these statements are accurate….
Some publishers arguments against RR are not actually
about RR: in reality, the points they make are focused on
their dislike of Green OA
権利保持に対する一部の出版社の主張は、実際には、権利保持に対するものではない。実際には、グリーンOAに反対なだけなのである。

Not one of these publishers’ arguments
provides a reason
why authors should give up their rights
どの出版社も、研究者が自身の権利を放棄しなければいけない理由を挙げることができていない。

Even though some, but by no means all, of thesestatements are accurate, the claims against author
rights retention are focused on some publisher’s clear
dislike of green open access, BUT not one of thearguments actually provides a reason why authors
should give up their rights.

23

•Some publishers’
arguments against
Rights Retention:
Claims *

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Gold OA is what authors want – Maybe. Not a reason to give up

rightsGreen OA “undermines progress” – Inaccurate & Not a reason to

give up rights

Potential problems with Green OA – Not a reason to give up rights
Emphasis on green OA is not constructive – Inaccurate & Not areason to give up rights

Risk of establishing green OA as the default – Deflection & Not areason to give up rights

Authors’ RR erodes the advantages of full OA – Inaccurate & Not areason to give up rights

Prefer not to enable author choice of green OA – Deflection & Not areason to give up rights•

Green OA removes incentives for institutions to transition funding
towards gold OA – Deflection & Not a reason to give up rights•

Green OA disincentivizes funders to establish structured funds to support
OA – Inaccurate & Not a reason to give up rights

•
•
•
•
•
Image:https://commons.wikimedia.org/wik
i/File:White_flag_waving.svg underhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/bysa/3.0/deed.en

Importance of the ‘Version of Record’ – Not a reason to give up rights

RRS undermines publishers’ progress & commitment to OA – Deflection& Not a reason to give up rights

Publishers produce high quality journals – True. But not a reason to

give up rights

Publishers add value – True. But not a reason to give up rights
RRS ignores long-standing academic freedoms – Inaccurate & Not areason to give up rights

Sustainability: RRS ‘provides an immediate free substitute thateliminates the ability to charge for the services that publishers provide.’ –Inaccurate & Not a reason to give up rights

主張*• 印刷版の重要性• 著者はゴールドOAを望む• グリーンOA* Many of theseclaims can be
refuted•（OAの）進展を止める•

グリーンOAには根本的問題あり•

グリーンOAの強調は建設的ではない•

グリーンOAが一般的となるリスク•

グリーンOAにより、機関がゴールドOAを負担しなくなる•

グリーンOAにより、研究助成機関がOAを負担しなくなる• 著者の権利保持は、フルOAの利点をなくする• 権利保持戦略は、（フルOA誌の代償の下）、研究者に購読誌に出版する機会を与える。
• 権利保持戦略は、出版社のOAに向けての努力を無にする• 出版社は高品質の雑誌を出版している。
• 出版社は付加価値をもたらしている。
• 権利保持戦略は、「学問の自由」を無視する• 持続性：権利保持戦略は、無償でOAにする道を開くため、出版社が提供するサービスに対して課金する機会がなくなる。

https://www.oaspa.org/news/open-post-the-rise-of-immediate-green-oa-undermines-progress/ Publishers’ response to launch of Plan S Rights Retention Strategy posted on OASPA site Dec 2020;
https://www.springernature.com/gp/open-research/journals-books/journals/going-for-gold-reach-and-impact; https://group.springernature.com/gp/group/media/press-releases/springer-nature-signs-jointletter-with-50--other-publishers-/18828798

For example, neither the fact that publishers produce high quality journals, orthat publishers add value are reasons for authors to give away their rights.
Arguing that green OA removes incentives for institutions to transition funding
towards gold OA is a deflection – institutions are not duty bound to spend theirbudgets on gold OA, especially when there are so many other new options
emerging, such as Subscribe to Open, diamond OA, new platforms such as
Octopus, the Peer Community In Notify initiative, and so on. Arguing that green
OA disincentivizes funders to establish structured funds to support OA is
spurious – funders are pouring millions into open access and open science, andcontinue to do so. Again, they do not have to be tied to a single paid gold OA
model in an evolving 21st century digital landscape. None of these publishers’
arguments provide any reason for authors to give away their rights.

24Part 5The bigger picture
Rights retention in the digital age
大局的視点
デジタル時代の権利保持

Looking forward25

デジタル時代の権利保持は、以下に繋がる

Rights retention in the digital age: Supports the following:
1. Actively & visibly support your researchers• Enable Author/Researcher choice• Focus on research dissemination not compliance• Primary focus on scholarship & shared knowledge
2. Embed core copyright & publishing policy tosupport current & future 21st century Open
Scholarship, and emerging models of research
dissemination• Throughout research process, not just at the end• New (& as yet unknown) output types (protocols,code, data, preprints, micropublications, etc)

• New & emerging models of ‘publishing’ (overlay

peer review, Notify initiative using repositories, etc)

3. Within research institutions: Author rights

underpin ability to manage research culture,recognition & reward, budgets

4. RR encourages globally equitable models ofdisseminating research findings

https://pixabay.com/photos/t
raffic-lights-green-lightstreet-6324351/

1. 研究者を実質的に支援する• 論文著者/研究者の選択を確保する• コンプライアンスではなく、研究発信に重点• 知識の共有に中心的重点
2. 現在と未来の21世紀のOpen Scholarshipと研究発信モデルに、著作権と出版ポリシーを埋め込む• 研究終了時だけでなく、研究プロセス• 新しい研究成果の形態（プロトコル、コード、
データ、プレプリント、マイクロ出版等）• 新しい出版モデル（オーバレイ査読、リポジ
トリを利用したNotify initiative ）3. 研究機関内において、著者の権利保持は、研究文化、評価、予算の礎となる。

4. 権利保持は、世界的に、平等な研究発信に繋がる。

5. アカデミアに、学術のコントールを戻す

5. Return control of scholarship to academia

In addition to the reasons already mentioned
Join in. don’t just view this as about RR, or compliance – fit with uni policies
Actively supporting employees – putting them first before external suppliers-------------------------------------Author rights retention actively & visibly supports researchers as open research
evolves, ensuring the focus is on scholarship and shared knowledge. Having
rights retention as a core part of a copyright & publishing policy supports
researchers to participate and flourish in the rapidly evolving 21st century open
scholarship environment. They can easily participate in new and emerging
models of global research dissemination.
For institutions, author rights retention is a lynchpin for establishing amodern global research culture, for enabling robust recognition & rewards,
and for managing squeezed budgets. Rights retention encourages more
equitable models of disseminating research findings, and ultimately, it
helps return control of scholarship to academia.

26Part 6
Japanese OA plan
How author rights retention will
support the plan
日本のOA政策
著者の権利保持が、日本のOA政策にどのように寄与するか

Now let’s consider the new Japanese plan for Open
Access27

G7オープンサイエンスWGの提言
Context: G7 Open Science working Group (OSWG)
recommendations• Address barriers that hinder scientific cooperation andslow the ability to respond to crises• 科学協力を妨げ、危機への対応能力を遅らせる障壁に対処する

Research assessment & incentives

研究評価とインセンティブ• i) Change the research assessment system to encourage
open science, through valuing more diversified research
outputs, activities, practices and career paths• i) より多様な研究成果、活動、実践、キャリアパスを• iv) raise awareness and provide leadership to promote
open science practices• iv) オープンサイエンスの実践を促進するために、啓• vi) provide infrastructures and support necessary topractice open science• vi) オープンサイエンスの実践に必要なインフラとサ• vii) provide education and training that enable
researchers to practice open science• vii) 研究者がオープンサイエンスを実践できるように、Interoperability & sustainability• i) the pandemic illustrated the importance of world-wide
sharing of data and other research outputs to accelerate
research and decision-making,

評価することにより、オープンサイエンスを促進する研究評価システムに移行する
発活動を行い、リーダーシップを発揮するポートを提供する

教育とトレーニングを提供する

相互運用性と持続可能性• i) パンデミックは、研究と意思決定を加速するために、データやその他の研究成果を世界規模で共有することの重要性を示した。

• ii) successful responses to common challenges andfuture global crises will require similar accessing, sharing,and comparing data;• ii) 共通の課題と将来の世界的危機に適切に対応する• iii) open science infrastructures therefore need to beembedded in standard workflows in advance in order tobe effectively leveraged during crisis situations.

• iii) したがって、危機的状況において効果的に活用可

G7 Hiroshima Summit, 2023. Communiqué
https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/kokusaiteki/g7_2023/annex1_os.pdf

ためには、同様の、データへのアクセス、共有、比較が必要である。
能とするためには、オープン サイエンス インフラス
トラクチャを日々の標準ワークフローに組み込んでおく必要がある。

I first want to add some context. Here are relevant
recommendations from the G7 Open Science working
group. The text mentions valuing more diversified
research outputs, promoting open science practices,and provision of infrastructure & support for open
science. It also stresses the need to be prepared forknowledge sharing to enable rapid responses toglobal crises.

28

著者の権利保持がG7ガイドラインの実践にどのように寄与するか

How author Rights Retention supports
implementation of G7 guidelines• Enables many more papers to be open: preparation forresponse to future crises• Can apply to any type of research output – makes it easierfor researcher• Promote RR as one element of soft research
infrastructure• Simple message to communicate to researchers• より多くの論文を公開できるようになる: 将来の危機への対応の備えとなる• あらゆる種類の研究成果に適用できる – 研究者にとって作業が容易となる• ソフトな研究インフラの一部として、権利保持を推進する• 研究者に伝えるシンプルなメッセージ

Author rights retention directly supports theserecommendations by enabling many more papers to
be open, by applying to any type of research output,
by being adopted as part of the research
infrastructure, and by being a simple message tocommunicate to researchers.

29https://en.unesco.org/science-sustainable-future/open-science/recommendation

背景： UNESCOオープンサイエンス勧告“Access toscientificknowledge
should be as
open aspossible”
UNESCO
Recommendations on
Open Science Para 8

科学的知識へのアクセスは
可能な限りオープンであ
るべきである

Adopted Nov 2021

Context: UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science• By promoting science that is more accessible, inclusive
and transparent, open science furthers the right ofeveryone to share in scientific advancement and its
benefits as stated in Article 27.1 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights.
• Guiding Principle: 13. The core values of open
science stem from the rightsbased,…legal,…implications of opening science tosociety and broadening the principles of openness to
the whole cycle of scientific research.
UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science asks Member
States to:• Promote a shared understanding of open science & set out
diverse paths to achieving it• Develop an enabling policy environment for open science• Invest in infrastructure and activities that contribute toopen science• Invest in training, education, digital literacy & capacitybuilding to support open science• Foster a culture of open science and align incentives tosupport it• Promote innovative approaches for open science at allstages of the scientific process• オープンサイエンスは、よりアクセスしやすく、
包括的、かつ、透明性のある科学を促進することにより、世界人権宣言第 27.1 条に記載あるよ
うな、科学の進歩とその利益をすべての人が共有する権利を促進します.
• 原則13. オープンサイエンスの中心的価値は、

オープンサイエンスが権利や法の観点から社会に対してもつ意味と、オープン性の原則が研究
サイクル全体に拡大することにある。

UNESCOオープンサイエンス勧告の加盟国への要求:•

オープンサイエンスに対する共通理解を促進し、それを達成するための多様な道筋を設定する•

オープンサイエンスを可能にする政策環境を開発する•

オープンサイエンスに繋がるインフラと活動に投資する•オープン サイエンスをサポートするため、トレーニング、
教育、デジタル リテラシー、能力開発に投資する•

オープンサイエンスの文化を醸成し、それをサポートするためのインセンティブを調整する•

科学プロセスのすべての段階において、オープンサイエ
ンスのための革新的なアプローチを推進する

Here is the context of the UNESCO recommendation
on open science, that has similar points aroundunderstanding, infrastructure, culture of open science,and innovation across the entire scientific process. It
promotes equity via links to the Universal Declarationon Human Rights and by its guiding principles:
Sharing by right, not by waivers and concessions.

30

背景： UNESCOオープンサイエンス勧告“Access toscientificknowledge
should be as
open aspossible”
UNESCO
Recommendations on
Open Science Para 8

科学的知識へのアクセスは
可能な限りオープンであ
るべきであるContext:
UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science
Section II: Definition of Open Science
第2節： オープンサイエンスの定義“Any transfer or licensing of copyrights to third parties
should not restrict the public’s right to immediate open
access to a scientific publication.”
いかなる著作権やライセンスの第三者への譲渡も、一般市民が科学出版物に即時かつオープンにアクセスする権利を妨げてはいけない。
[Para 7a, Page 9]

Adopted Nov 2021

https://en.unesco.org/science-sustainable-future/open-science/recommendation

UNESCO importantly states that “Any transfer or
licensing of copyrights to third parties should not
restrict the public’s right to immediate open access toa scientific publication.”31著者の権利保持がUNESCOオープンサイエンス勧告にどのように寄与するか“Access toscientificknowledge
should be as
open aspossible”
UNESCO
Recommendations on
Open Science Para 8

科学的知識へのアクセスは
可能な限りオープンであ
るべきである

How Author Rights Retention directly supports UNESCO
Recommendations on Open Science• Enables diverse paths to achieving Open Science• Forms key element of an enabling policy for open
science• Part of an investment in soft infrastructure andactivities that contribute to open science – especiallywhen coupled with repository provision• Communications and training around RR increases
digital literacy to support open science• Helps foster a culture of open science• Enables an innovative approach for open science andcan be applied to all stages of the scientific process
Plus:• Maximises numbers of papers made open access• Enables findings to be more accessible, inclusive andtransparent in support of Universal Declaration on
Human Rights• Allows the broadening of the principles of openness to
the whole cycle of scientific research• Ensures that restrictive transfer or licensing of
copyrights to third parties is not able to restrict the
public’s right to immediate open access to a scientificpublication• オープンサイエンスを実現するための多様な道を可能とする• オープンサイエンスを可能にする政策の重要な要素を形成する• 特にリポジトリの提供と組み合わせた場合、オー
プン サイエンスに貢献するソフト・インフラと活動への投資の一部となる• 権利保持 に関するコミュニケーションとトレーニ
ンは、オープンサイエンス促進につながるデジタ
ル リテラシーを向上させる• オープンサイエンスの文化を醸成• 科学プロセスのすべての段階に適用可能な、オー
プンサイエンスの革新的アプローチが可能となる。
加えて• OA論文数を最大化する• 世界人権宣言に倣い、発明や発見をよりアクセス
しやすく、包括的かつ透明性のくできる。
• 公開の原則を、科学研究のサイクル全体に拡大できる• いかなる著作権やライセンスの第三者譲渡も、一般市民が科学出版物に即時かつオープンにアクセスする権利を妨げないことを保証する。

Again, author rights retention directly supports the
UNESCO recommendations on open science by being
an enabling tool that underpins innovation andequitable knowledge sharing.

32

日本の即時OA政策の主要ポイント

Key elements in the Japanese OA publications plan
• Applies from April 2025 for competitively
funded research• Focus on G7 open science priorities, sharedvalues, co-operation & collaboration• Focus on academic papers to be as open as possible, andas secure as necessary & enhance the ability of
researchers to disseminate their research outputs.

• Give back research findings to the public• Market dominance of publishers negatively
affects dissemination of papers• Distribution [of academic papers] is under the market
dominance of the global academic publishers. The
government will support enhancing the ability tonegotiate for universities and research institutes withacademic publishers, based on the national policy.

• Adopt 21st century research dissemination
models to maintain national competitiveness• Promote efforts to ensure access to a variety ofknowledge, including new forms such as preprints.

• Focus on ‘Green’ OA via institutional
repositories• Cost consideration• ￥10 billion allocated for institutional repositories tomake science free to read [Infrastructure]https://pixabay.com/vectors/fl
ag-japan-japanese-nation32177/• 2025年度競争的研究公募から適用• G7のオープンサイエンス優先事項、共通の価値観、協力の原則に則る• 学術論文が可能な限りオープン、かつ、必要に応じて安全確保されたかたちで、研究者が研究成果を最大限広められることに重点• 研究成果の社会還元• 出版社の市場支配は、論文の普及に悪影響• [学術論文の]流通は世界的な学術出版社の市場支配下にあり、政府は、国の方針を踏まえ、大学や研究機関と学術出版社との交渉能力強化を支援• 国家競争力を維持するため、21世紀の研究普及モデルを採用• プレプリントなどの新たな形式も含め、多様な知識へのアクセスを確保する取り組みを推進• 機関リポジトリを介した「グリーン」を採用• 経済性を勘案• 研究成果即時OAのために100億円の予算投下（インフラ）

Integrated Innovation Strategy 2023 (Tentative translation). 9th June 2023. Cabinet Decision https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/tougosenryaku/togo2023_honbun_eiyaku.pdf
Dalmeet Singh Chawla, Japan’s push to make all research OA is taking shape. Nature. 3rd June 2024. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-01493-8

Turning to the Japanese OA plan [which I have only
seen in translation], there appear to be 6 key
elements around shared values, collaboration, publicaccess, budgetary consideration, national
competitiveness, and repositories as a key vehicle fordissemination.

33

著者の権利保持が日本の即時OA政策にどのように寄与するか
How Author Rights Retention will enable the new Japanese plan to succeed
Japanese OA Plan
Rights Retention Enabling
日本の即時OA政策
権利保持の寄与https://pixabay.com/vectors/fl
ag-japan-japanese-nation32177/

1.

Focus on G7 open science priorities, sharedvalues, co-operation & collaboration

2.

Give back research findings to the public

3.

Market dominance of publishers negatively
affects dissemination of papers

4.

Adopt 21st century research dissemination
models to maintain national
competitiveness5.

Focus on ‘Green’ OA via institutional
repositories

1. G7のオープンサイエンス優先事項、共通の価値観、協力の原則に則る
2. 研究成果の社会還元
3. 出版社の市場支配は、論文の普及に悪影響
4. 国家競争力を維持するため、21世紀の研究普及モデルを採用
5. 機関リポジトリを介した「グリーン」OA を採用

1.

Enhances the ability of researchers to disseminate their research
outputs and make as many of them as possible them as open as
possible

2.

Maximises the ability to give back scholarly outputs to the public

3.

Addresses the difficulties of 3rd party complex terms andconditions & strengthens university negotiating position

4.

On point for supporting new models of research dissemination in
the digital age to aid competitiveness and improve researchcollaboration

5.

Maximises dissemination and curation opportunities offered by
Institutional Repositories

1. 研究者が、可能な限り多くの研究成果を可能な限りオープンに広めることを可能にする。
2. 学術成果の社会還元を最大化する。
3. サードパーティの複雑な契約条件に対処し、大学の交渉立場を強化する。
4. 競争力を高め、研究協力を促進させるための、デジタル時代の研究普及の新しいモデルをサポートする
5. 機関リポジトリのコンテンツ配信とキュレーション機
能を最大化する

Author rights retention will enable the new plan tosucceed, because it enhances the ability of researchers
to disseminate their research outputs and make as manyof them as possible them as open as possible. It
maximises the ability to give back scholarly outputs tothe public; it addresses the difficulties of 3rd party
complex terms & conditions, and strengthens university
negotiating positions; it supports new models of
research dissemination in the digital age to aid
competitiveness, and improve research collaboration;and finally it maximises dissemination & curation
opportunities offered by Institutional Repositories.

34

100億円の投資のリターン

Return on investment on ￥10 billion• Build on previous investment in
repositories• Author Rights Retention maximises
the effectiveness of Green OA
strategy• It does this by:• Blanket option to enable all papers to
be immediately OA – everyone caneasily fulfil the strategy• Simplifies instructions for authors(library support)• Unified message to all (reduces policy
stack problem)• Supporting 21st century research
dissemination models via repositories• Economic considerations• OA in published journals but not at any
cost• Increases negotiating power• Simplifies repository workflows (saves
time and therefore money)• これまでのリポジトリへの投資に則る• 著者の権利保持は、グリーンOA戦略の効果を最大化する• その方法• すべての論文を即座に OA にできるブラン
ケット オプション - 誰もが簡単に戦略を実行可能• 著者向け説明の簡素化 （図書館のサポート）• 全員への統一メッセージ（ポリシーの機能不全を軽減）• リポジトリを介した 21 世紀の研究普及モデ
ルをサポート• 経済的効果• 購読誌のOAに繋がる（ただし、コストがな
いわけではない）• 交渉力拡大に繋がる• リポジトリの登録作業を簡略化する（時間とお金の節約）

Given the considerable investment in repositories,
adopting author rights retention helps build on theprevious investment in repositories and maximises
the effectiveness of the green OA strategy. It does thisin a number of ways, including supporting 21st century
innovative research dissemination models via
repositories, and by helping address budgetary
constraints.

35

Authors right to use their own work:

How to get there.

• Need to take action• Ideally change the law• Slow but not impossible• Eg Secondary publishing right• Adopted Slovenia, Bulgaria, etc•[https://www.knowledgerights21.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/KR21-Secondary-PublishingRights-Position-paper-v1.1.pdf]• Funders adopt supportive policies• Eg Plan S Rights Retention Strategy• Raise researcher’s awareness• Work in collaboration & in consultation withresearchers explaining the reasoning• Universities & research institutions adopt
policies that support their researchers• See global list of RR policies[https://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/University_rights-retention_OA_policies]• Eg Harvard etc• Norway [https://www.openscience.no/aktuelt/institusjonell-rettighetspolitikk-rrsirrs-ved-norske-forskningsinstitusjoner]• UK [https://sje30.github.io/rrs/rrs.html]• Once you’ve got an OA option that doesn’t
need a publisher, THEN you can startnegotiating a publisher’s deal on a morelevel playing field
https://pixabay.com/illustrations/progressgrowth-success-business-3936332/

自身の研究成果を利用できる権利保持をどのように実現するか• アクションに移る必要あり• 可能であれば法改正•••時間はかかるが、不可能ではない「二次出版権」など
スロベニア、ブルガリア等において採択•[https://www.knowledgerights21.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/KR21-Secondary-PublishingRights-Position-paper-v1.1.pdf]• 研究助成機関による（権利保持に繋がる）
ポリシー採択•Plan S権利保持戦略• 研究者の意識向上•

権利保持の必要性を理論立てて説明してくれる研究者と、相談・協力の下、進める• 大学や研究機関が、研究者をサポートする
ポリシーを採択する••••

世界の権利保持ポリシー一覧を確認[https://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/University_rights-retention_OA_policies]

Eg Harvard etc
Norway [https://www.openscience.no/aktuelt/institusjonell-rettighetspolitikk-

rrs-irrs-ved-norske-forskningsinstitusjoner]

UK [https://sje30.github.io/rrs/rrs.html]• 出版社を要さないOAオプションを確保することで、出版社との交渉を１つ上の次元で、より有利に進めることができる

Adopting author rights retention requires action. Ideally nationallaw would be changed. This can be very slow, but not impossible– I refer you to countries such as Slovenia and Bulgaria that are
adopting secondary publishing rights. Research funders canadopt supportive policies like cOAlition S and its Rights
Retention Strategy. Work can be undertaken to raise individual
researchers’ awareness of their rights. The pragmatic solutionthat is being adopted by many universities is to adopt author
rights retention policies that support all their researchers. For
institutions adopting rights retention policies, once they have an
OA option that doesn’t need a publisher, THEN the institution
can start negotiating publication deals on a more level playing
field.

36

著者の権利保持を推進・採用する理由

Good reasons to promote & adopt Author Rights Retention
1. Excessive gift: a publisher does not need authors’
rights to publish their manuscript• Limits author re-use including translation rights• Shift the gift: Retain your rights to share with whom
you should be sharing - the global research community

2. Gift to the world• Opens opportunities for wider global sharing ofresearch findings• Benefits research, researchers and wider society

3. Economic:• Having a Rights Retention Policy strengthens yournegotiating position for OA deals• Simplifies processing & workflows for repositories(saves time and money)

4. Researchers fears not realized:• Many researchers are already retaining their rights –and continue to publish with their chosen
journal/publisher

1. 出版社は論文出版のために、著作権を必要としない••

著作権譲渡は、翻訳する権利も含め、著者が自身の原稿を利用する権利を制限する
Shift the gift: 権利を保持し、世界の研究コミュ
ニティなど、必要な者と研究成果は共有すべき

2. 研究成果を世界に届けよう！
••

研究成果を世界と共有する機会を確保
研究、研究者、社会に資する

3. 経済効果••

権利保持ポリシーを有することで、OA出版契約の交渉量拡大リポジトリの登録作業を簡略化する（時間とお金の節約）

4. （出版社による反撃可能性という意味での）研究者の懸念は現実のものとなっていない•

5. RR Underpins dissemination in the digital age:

多くの研究者は既に権利保持をし、そして自身の好む学術雑誌/出版社で論文を出版• By not giving away their rights, researchers are better 5. 権利保持は、デジタル時代の研究配信の礎
enabled to take opportunities for participating in 21st
• 権利放棄をしないことで、研究者は21世紀デジ
century digital research dissemination models
タルの研究配信モデルに参加可能

https://pixabay.com/photos/t
raffic-lights-green-lightstreet-6324351/

6. Common practice:• Author rights retention is rapidly becoming the defacto norm – don’t get left behind

6. 一般的慣習へ•

著者の権利保持は急速に普及しつつあるー遅れないで！

My final slide lists good reasons to promote & adopt author rights retention either
locally or nationally. Firstly, the current practice of authors giving away theirrights can be described as an Excessive gift. A publisher does not need authors’
rights to publish their manuscript. Shift the gift so that researchers maximise
their sharing with the global research community as a gift to the world. This will
open opportunities for wider global sharing & collaboration, and will benefit
research, researchers, and wider society.


Having a Rights Retention Policy strengthens a university’s negotiating
position for OA arrangements, to enable fairer & more sustainable deals.
Many publishers insist that their paid gold OA option should be the ultimate
aim. Remember that this paid Gold OA is not controllable: there has beenan almost 10% price increase in a single year. This is unsustainable.
Retaining authors rights is essential to regain control of budgets.
It is important that the transition to full open scholarship happens in as
short a time frame as possible. A recent report by Jisc states that “Based on
the journal flipping rates observed between 2018 – 2022 it would take atleast 70 years for the big five publishers to flip their Transformative
Arrangement titles to OA.” This is another reason to exploit the affordable

37

dissemination opportunities offered by repositories.





o

https://zenodo.org/records/10787392

Note that researchers fears have not been realized and many researchers
are already retaining their rights, whilst continuing to publish with theirchosen journal.
RR Underpins dissemination in the digital age because, by not giving away
their rights, researchers better enable opportunities for participating in 21st
century digital research dissemination models.
Transferring control of author’s use of content and control of budgets backto academia, is the only way to ensure affordable, global scholarship, in thedigital age
And finally, Author rights retention is rapidly becoming the de facto norm –don’t get left behind37

Publish with Power – Protect your Rights
力強く自由に研究配信できる世界に向けて
ー自身の権利を守りましょう！

Thank youありがとうございます。

www.coalition-s.org
info@coalition-s.org@cOAlitions_OA@cOAlitionS_OA@fediscience.org

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Thank you38