There is a blatant contradiction between two statements of Institute of Physics (
IOP) Publishers policy on Green OA self-archiving of the author's refereed final draft. It is not clear whether IOP is on the
side of the angels or...:
A. There is
this one, according to which IOP is and remains on the side of the angels:
...Exercise of the rights in 3.3 additionally must not use the final published IOP format but the Named Author’s own format (which may include amendments made following peer review).
….3.3.2 Include the Article (all or part) on a Named Author’s own personal web site;
3.3.3 Include the Article (all or part) on web sites of the Institution (including its repository) where a Named Author worked when research for the Article was carried out; and
3.3.4 Include the Article (all or part) on third party web sites including e-print servers, but not on other publisher’s web sites.
G. Then there is
this one (amidst a lot of puffery about Gold OA publication), according to which "IOPScience" is on the other side:
What is IOP's policy on self-archiving?
IOP also supports authors who are required by their funding agencies to make their research papers freely available via an institutional or subject repository. Authors may post their accepted manuscript in an institutional or subject repository after an embargo period of 12-24 months following publication, depending on the journal.
Question for the
Managing Director of IOP Publishing (Steven Hall): Which is it? Angels or...? And if this is a difference between
IOP policy and "
IOPScience" policy, it would be very helpful to have a clear explanation of which is which, and which journals are involved in each.
Addendum
I may be mistaken, but I think IOP may be conflating IOP journal embargo policies and IOP repository embargo policies.
According to IOP's current online documentation (not only the current IOP general copyright form, but also the current IOP copyright FAQs - see
below), IOP authors may immediately deposit the author's final draft in their institutional repository (or a central repository, like Arxiv). No embargo. No fee:
IOP | For Authors Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
e-print servers
12. I have submitted my article to an IOP journal. Can I also submit it to
arXiv.org or any other repository as well?Yes, articles may be posted on non-commercial third party websites, including arXiv and other repositories. The author’s own original format should be used (which may include amendments made by the author following peer review). This is the version commonly known as the accepted manuscript. If possible, citation information should be included with IOP’s copyright notice. Once the final version has been published, best efforts must also be made to include a link to the online abstract of the paper in the journal. Authors MUST NOT deposit the published IOP formatted version. IOP also requests that you include the following statement of provenance: 'This is an author-created, un-copyedited version of an article accepted for publication in [insert name of journal]. IOP Publishing Ltd is not responsible for any errors or omissions in this version of the manuscript or any version derived from it. The definitive publisher authenticated version is available online at [insert DOI].'
When submitting an article to arXiv you have to select a licence or declaration which gives the arXiv the rights necessary to distribute your article. IOP is happy for you to select the first option offered, namely 'arXiv.org perpetual, non-exclusive licence to distribute your article'. Please do not accept any of the other options without consulting with IOP in advance at permissions@iop.org.
See also Question 17 below.
Author’s rights after publication by IOP
17. May I post my paper on my personal website or my institutional website?
Yes, IOP authors can place their papers (all or part) on their own personal website, but they must not use the IOP formatted version of record (PDF or HTML). Instead they can make use of the article in their own format, which can include amendments made following peer review. This is the version commonly known as the accepted manuscript. The purpose of the posting must be non-commercial, if possible should display citation information and IOP’s copyright notice. Once the final version has been published, best efforts must be made to include a link back to the online abstract in the journal. Authors MUST NOT post the published IOP formatted version. IOP also requests that you include the following statement of provenance: 'This is an author-created, un-copyedited version of an article accepted for publication in [insert name of journal]. IOP Publishing Ltd is not responsible for any errors or omissions in this version of the manuscript or any version derived from it. The definitive publisher authenticated version is available online at [insert DOI].'
IOP authors may also place their papers on the website of the institution (including its repository) where a named author worked when research for the article was carried out, however there is an embargo period that can vary between journals so please refer to the individual journal copyright forms. Typical embargo periods range from 12-24 months.
For posting on e-print servers see Question 12 above.
There is no mention at all made of exceptions --
by journal. However, there is a mention of an exception by
repository: For some (unspecified) reason, IOP authors may not deposit their final drafts in NIH's PubMed Central:
13. What is IOP’s policy with regard to UK PubMed Central and NIH?
On or after acceptance for publication IOP authors may deposit their articles in PubMed/NIH provided the articles are embargoed for public release for 12 months from the official date of publication and further provided the deposited version is in the author’s own original format (which may include amendments made by the author following peer review). This is the version commonly known as the accepted manuscript. Authors MUST NOT deposit the published IOP formatted version. IOP also requests that you include the following statement of provenance: 'This is an author-created, un-copyedited version of an article accepted for publication in [insert name of journal]. IOP Publishing Ltd is not responsible for any errors or omissions in this version of the manuscript or any version derived from it. The definitive publisher authenticated version is available online at [insert DOI].'
IOP is currently considering introducing a service to deposit articles at UK PubMed Central and NIH for authors in the future.
Now this exception (though a rather arbitrary one) would still leave IOP on the side of the angels. Could someone from IOP please confirm whether this continues to be the only exception (apart from rival publishers' 3rd-party repositories, of course)? That would serve to correct the apparent contradiction with the following
June 2011 update:
IOP Publishing open access policy
What is IOP's policy on self-archiving?
IOP also supports authors who are required by their funding agencies to make their research papers freely available via an institutional or subject repository. Authors may post their accepted manuscript in an institutional or subject repository after an embargo period of 12-24 months following publication, depending on the journal.
Publishing a gold OA journal (New Journal of Physics, NJP), as IOP does, is admirable, but if I am not mistaken, IOP publishes 29 journals -- plus 38 more in partnership with other learned societies. I will assume (conservatively) that the IOP FAQ speaks only for the 29 journals published by IOP (although IOP's one pure open access journal, NJP, is one of the partnered journals). Open access means open access to all the articles in all the 29 IOP journal, not just the articles in NJP.
Not that being "on the side of the angels" means that all 29 IOP journals need to be gold OA journals: it just means that all 29 IOP journals endorse author self-archiving of the final draft, immediately upon acceptance for publication (green OA). That is what the current IOP copyright agreement states clearly in clause 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 and the current IOP copyright FAQ states clearly in clause 12 and 17.
Being "on the side of the angels" has become a metaphor in the OA world for endorsing immediate green OA self-archiving of the author's final draft, as IOP had done since at least 2006.
Regarding the sustainability of the subscription model, Alma Swan reported in 2005 that IOP and APS, the publishers with the longest experience with green OA self archiving, dating all the way back to 1991, and having long ago reached 100% in several fields, responded as follows:
"In a separate exercise we asked the American Physical Society (APS) and the Institute of Physics Publishing Ltd (IOPP) what their experiences have been over the 14 years that arXiv has been in existence. How many subscriptions have been lost as a result of arXiv? Both societies said they could not identify any losses of subscriptions for this reason and that they do not view arXiv as a threat to their business (rather the opposite --in fact the APS helped establish an arXiv mirror site at the Brookhaven National Laboratory)."
CODA
Now it would look unprepossessing in the extreme, would it not, if a publisher were to air the following policy today:
"We are progressive publishers, not trying to oppose OA: You may make your final draft green OA by depositing it in your institutional repository -- except if you are mandated to do so (by your funder or institution), and especially if your funder or institution is foolish enough to offer to pay for gold OA. In that case, you may only deposit it if you pay; or must wait 12 or 24 months if you don't -- even if you've already been providing immediate green OA for free for 'lo these 20 past years already..."