Transfer Update Elizabeth L. Winter Electronic Resources Coordinator Georgia Institute of Technology...
-
Upload
phyllis-shepherd -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of Transfer Update Elizabeth L. Winter Electronic Resources Coordinator Georgia Institute of Technology...
Transfer Update
Elizabeth L. WinterElizabeth L. WinterElectronic Resources CoordinatorElectronic Resources CoordinatorGeorgia Institute of TechnologyGeorgia Institute of Technology
&&Member, Project TRANSFER Working GroupMember, Project TRANSFER Working Group
ICOLC MeetingICOLC MeetingApril 15, 2008April 15, 2008
Session Overview
About Project TRANSFERWhy journals move between publishers Implications of these movesProgress so farCurrent statusCode of PracticeChallengesNext StepsRole of Consortia
About Project TRANSFER
Sponsored by United Kingdom Serials Group
Work began in April 2006 Objective:
To improve the procedures and policies surrounding the transfer of journals so that the annual movement of journals causes the minimum disruption and adheres to an agreed Code of Practice.
www.projectransfer.org
Working Group Members Richard Gedye (OUP/Oxford
Journals) Paul Harwood (Content
Complete Ltd) Helen Henderson (Ringgold
e-Marketing Services) Alison Mitchell (Nature
Publishing Group) Cliff Morgan (John Wiley &
Sons) Jill Taylor-Roe (University of
Newcastle upon Tyne) Elizabeth Winter (Georgia
Tech)
Chair: Ed Pentz (CrossRef) Nancy Buckley (Burgundy
Information Services Ltd) Yvonne Campfens (Springer) Diane Cogan (Elsevier
Science) Louise Cole (University of
Leeds) Jo Connolly (Swets
Information Services) Helen Cooke (Sage) Tim Devenport (Macmillan) Nick Evans (ALPSP)
Why Journals Move
It’s not the journals that move – it’s the societies that move their publishing arrangements.
Reality or perception that one publisher can do a better job regarding: Stability and growth of revenues Retention of ownership and control of editorial
policy and pricing Economies of scale Expanding readership Branding & PR Innovation
What are the implications of journal transfers…For Publishers?
For Intermediaries?
For Librarians?
For Publishers Receiving/sending subscriber data in a timely manner Logging and merging data with existing systems Interpreting subscriber data customers (incl. backfile
access rights) Receiving/sending content files and uploading into
existing platforms –conflicting formats, digitization issues
Maintaining links to previous/new publisher platforms Maintaining old content on current platforms Ownership of backfiles Liaison with third parties
For Intermediaries
A case study:A case study:
In 2007 EBSCO logged 2,667 unique In 2007 EBSCO logged 2,667 unique titles that moved from one publisher to titles that moved from one publisher to another.another.
2,667 titles moving between publishers 2,667 titles moving between publishers required EBSCO to make 20,000-25,000 required EBSCO to make 20,000-25,000 changes to their title file.changes to their title file.
For Librarians Being aware of timing and implications of
transfer in time to make appropriate changes to library data records (ILS, link resolver, ERM, etc.).
Retaining appropriate access to previously subscribed content
Maintaining accurate and comparable usage data (COUNTER-compliant)
Ensuring no negative impacts in terms of access for our customers (loss of access, link resolver out-of-date, etc.)
Having reliable, timely and accessible source of data on transfers
For example: “In 2008, 26 journals are moving to [publisher] and
will be available electronically on [publisher platform], [publisher] 's online journal delivery platform. If your library has access to one or more of these journals through your participation in a consortial network, please contact us at your earliest convenience so that we can ensure your access is uninterrupted. To view a list of journals moving to [publisher] in 2008 please visit [publisher web site] and fill out the form to ensure your continued access. We will let you know once your online access has been activated and will contact you to discuss your subscription/access options now that these journals are published by [publisher].”
TRANSFER Timeline
April 2006
April 2007
May 2007
April 2008
Working Group formed
Draft Code launched at
UKSG
Revised Code launched at
UKSG
Publisherssign up
Concerns Extensive discussion and review
?
Publisher Concerns
“Mandatory” language needed to be removed (conflict with existing contracts)
Didn’t take into account the variety of business models
Too specific about definition of archival access (variety in customer contracts)
Other Issues
Mandatory submission of transfer data elements to a TRANSFER database (scoped, but did not exist)
References to auditing for compliance (no procedures existed for this)
Competition issues (journal ownership governed by contracts and business arrangements)
Current Status
Last week: Released Version 1.0 of the Code for public review period, until 31 May 2008
Also released Supplementary Information = guidelines for publishers on practical aspects of implementing the Code of Practice
Code: Transferring Publisher
Access to title: Transferring Publisher (TP) keeps content online up to six months if Receiving Publisher (RP) isn’t readyPerpetual access rights: TP ensures
continued access where rights have been granted. TP non-exclusive right or transfer obligation to RP
Digital content files: TP makes available within 4 weeks of signature of contract or 4 months before Effective Transfer Date whichever is later
Code: Transferring Publisher
Subscription lists: Same timing as content. TP makes details of subscription data available (consortia subscribers w/perpetual access, lapsed subscribers)
Journal URLs: TP redirects for 12 months or transfer URL to RP
Communication: TP notifies subscribers of transfer as soon as possible after contract or no less than 2 months before Effective Transfer Date
DOI name ownership: Follows CrossRef procedures
Code: Receiving Publisher
Access to the title: RP provides access from Effective Transfer Date but must permit TP to keep content online if not readyPerpetual access rights: RP honors
rights granted by TPArchiving services: content must
remain in archives; encouraged to continue existing arrangements
Code: Receiving Publisher
Communication: RP notifies subscribers of transfer as soon as possible after contract or no less than 2 months before Effective Transfer Date
Subscription lists: RP contacts existing subscribers according to info. from TP
DOI name ownership: Follows CrossRef procedures
Challenges
Feasibility of Feasibility of compliance for compliance for publishers and publishers and
societiessocietiesvs. vs.
Giving the Code Giving the Code “teeth” for librarians “teeth” for librarians
and consortiaand consortia
http://www.flickr.com/photos/procsilas/1283513775/
Next Steps
Continue to solicit buy-in After comment period, Code of Practice will
be formally released and publishers will be asked to agree to follow the Code. Publishers agreeing to align their procedures with the Code, and to apply them in practice when working with other, similarly aligned publishers, will be considered “TRANSFER Compliant.”
Working Group will re-establish itself officially under UKSG, as the TRANSFER Committee
Next Steps
Once formed, the TRANSFER Committee will: Oversee implementation of a TRANSFER
Alerting Service, a central location for basic details of transfers
Oversee compliance with the Code, conduct periodic reviews of the effectiveness of the Code and receive complaints on non-compliance
Consider future revisions to the Code of Practice and establish procedures on how any revisions will be made and approved
Role of Consortia
Read and understand the CodeTalk with publishers about
TRANSFER—use your clout to encourage compliance
Insist on TRANSFER compliance in your publisher agreements and license terms
Thank you!www.projecttransfer.org
Elizabeth L. WinterElectronic Resources CoordinatorGeorgia Institute of Technology