Tennant et al.: Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing (2019)

https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7020034

1. Will preprints get your research ‘scooped’?

[No.] “To the best of our knowledge, there is virtually no evidence that ‘scooping’ of research via preprints exists”

2. Do the Journal Impact Factor [JIF] and journal brand measure the quality of authors and their research?

[No.] “[T]here is little basis for connecting JIFs with any quality measure, and inappropriate association of the two will continue to have deleterious effects”.

3. Does approval by peer review prove that you can trust a research paper, its data and the reported conclusions?

[No.] “Scientists understand that peer review is a human process, with human failings, and that despite its limitations, we need it. But these subtleties are lost on the general public, who often only hear the statement that being published in a journal with peer review is the “gold standard” and can erroneously equate published research with the truth.”

4. Will the quality of the scientific literature suffer without journal-imposed peer review?

[No.] “[I]t seems that the strong coupling between journals and peer review as a requirement to protect scientific integrity seems to undermine the very foundations of scholarly inquiry”.

5. Is Open Access [OA] responsible for creating predatory publishers?

[No.] “Associating OA with predatory publishing is […] misleading”.

6. Is copyright transfer required to publish and protect authors?

[No.] “[W]e are unaware of a single reason why copyright transfer is required for publication, or indeed a single case where a publisher has exercised copyright in the best interest of the authors”.

7. Does gold Open Access have to cost a lot of money for authors, and is it synonymous with the APC business model?

[No.] “Not only is there already more than enough money ‘within the system’ to enable a full and immediate transition to OA […], but there is an enormous potential to do so in a cost-effective manner that promotes more equitable participation in publication”.

8. Are embargo periods on ‘green’ OA needed to sustain publishers?

[No.] “[T]here is little evidence or justification supporting the need for embargo periods”.

9. Are Web of Science and Scopus global platforms of knowledge?

[No.] “As a global community, we have not yet been able to develop digital infrastructures which are truly equal, comprehensive, multi-lingual and allows fair participation in knowledge creation”.

10. Do publishers add value to the scholarly communication process?

[Yes.] “[S]cholarly publishing is not a simple process, and publishers do add value to current scholarly communication”.

USA vs. India: The Price for ‘Predatory’ Publishing? $50 Million

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/science/predatory-journals-ftc-omics.html

The US Federal Trade Commission has announced “on Wednesday that it has won a $50 million court judgment against Omics International of Hyderabad, India, and its owner, Srinubabu Gedela. […] Omics is “the Walmart of predatory publishers and conference organizers,” Derek Pyne, an associate professor of economics at Thompson Rivers University in British Columbia, said in an email.”

BodoArXiv

“Named after a Carolingian peasant made famous by historian Eileen Power (1889-1940), BodoArXiv gathers scholarly literature in medieval studies across the disciplines. It provides an open, non-profit repository for papers at different stages of gestation, including works that may later find themselves in article form and/or behind a paywall.”

https://bodoarxiv.org/?ct=t%28Newsletter%234_COPY_01%29

“The BodoArXiv moderation process accepts papers that:
[…] Are in languages that we can moderate. We welcome work submitted in any language, provided we have a moderator that can review it adequately according to our policy. At present we have volunteers available to moderate in all western European languages, Arabic, Greek and Hebrew. Papers in additional languages will be held in the moderation queue until we can get them read.”

Controlled Digital Lending by Libraries

https://controlleddigitallending.org/

“Controlled Digital Lending (CDL) is an emerging method that allows libraries to loan print books to digital patrons in a “lend like print” fashion. Through CDL, libraries use technical controls to ensure a consistent “owned-to-loaned” ratio, meaning the library circulates the exact number of copies of a specific title it owns, regardless of format, putting controls in place to prevent users from redistributing or copying the digitized version. When CDL is appropriately tailored to reflect print book market conditions and controls are properly implemented, CDL may be permissible under existing copyright law. CDL is not intended to act as a substitute for existing electronic licensing services offered by publishers. Indeed, one significant advantage of CDL is addressing the “Twentieth Century Problem” of older books still under copyright but unlikely ever to be offered digitally by commercial services.”

Signatories to the Position Statement on Controlled Digital Lending by Libraries include:

Authors Alliance
Digital Public Library of America
Duke University Libraries
Internet Archive
UC Berkeley Library
California Digital Library

On the Digital Lending Feature of the Internet Archive see here:
https://archivalia.hypotheses.org/81128
https://archivalia.hypotheses.org/97266

See also
https://blog.ualberta.ca/controlled-digital-lending-a5e9d14dc56b
http://blog.bibliothekarisch.de/blog/tag/controlled-digital-lending/
https://publishingperspectives.com/2019/02/aap-slams-cdl-controlled-digital-lending-uk-authors-appeal-to-internet-archive-funders/
https://www.ifla.org/node/91896?og=29

Edward III And Philippa Of Hainault’s marriage contract goes up for sale

“The 1326 marriage contract between Edward III and Philippa of Hainault will be going up for sale at auction later this month. It is expected to be sold for between £100,000-150,000.”

http://www.medievalists.net/2019/03/edward-iii-and-philippa-of-hainaults-marriage-contract-goes-up-for-sale/

“Legally Binding” exhibition now online

“A number of people have expressed interest in seeing images from the Yale Library’s current exhibition, “Legally Binding: Fine & Historic Bindings from the Yale Law Library.” Images are now available in the “Legally Binding” album on our Flickr site, at

https://www.flickr.com/photos/yalelawlibrary/albums/72157678525675828

For several of the books, there are images of both the front and rear covers. Clicking on an individual image brings up a downloadable image plus the text from the exhibit label. There is also a link to the “Legally Binding” album in a recent post for the Yale Law Library Rare Books Blog…

https://library.law.yale.edu/news/legally-binding-exhibition-goes-online
… together with links to related resources, including “Bookbindings on Incunables: The Scott Husby Database at Princeton University Library,” https://husby.princeton.edu/, which kindly gave permission to use its images of our books.” (EXLIBRIS-L)

#buchgeschichte

For an overseer of Roman prisons, ca. 1720