Following the publication of our recent article in Insights: Buck, S. (2018). The ‘upside down’: exploring offset pricing models and article deposit terms at King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST). Insights, 31, 42. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.438
we wish to bring the following corrigendum to your attention.
There are three sections (from Buck 20181) that are to be corrected to accurately reflect the position at KAUST at the time of writing.
In the MIT-Springer Author Rights Agreement section, the paragraph beginning ‘This allows MIT authors to post articles …’ is corrected to:
This allows MIT authors to post articles (on author’s departmental web pages) after nine months. They may be archived and/or deposited in any repository for non-commercial purposes. This is applicable to articles published in a Springer journal subscribed to in 2009–2017. At the time of writing this article KAUST is in negotiation with Springer regarding a mutually workable model.
In the Institute of Physics (IOP) section, the paragraph beginning ‘Ultimately, although we wanted to progress …’ is corrected to:
Ultimately, although we wanted to progress with the IOP model (and we emphasized to faculty that we were not telling them where to publish), we failed, at the time, to convince faculty of the merits of the model and so did not implement it.
In the OA2020 Transformation section, the paragraph beginning ‘Last March my library director …’ is corrected to:
Last March my library director and I were able to visit the MPDL in Munich. I was unsure whether this would be a conference or a workshop, but it turned out to be a meeting of like-minded institutions, mainly from Europe and the Nordic countries, who aim to convert the majority of today’s scholarly journals from subscription to OA publishing. KAUST was initially a signatory of the Expression of Interest14(which invites all parties involved in scholarly publishing to collaborate on a swift and efficient transition for the benefit of scholarship and society at large) but withdrew after consideration. An example of such collaboration is when in 2014 the Ebola crisis in West Africa was at its peak and certain paywalled papers on the virus were made freely available by some of the larger publishers. While this was a welcome development, the argument for OA for the greater good will not be compelling enough for many. By co-operating at an international level, we can effect change.
The author has declared no competing interests.
Buck, S. (2018). The ‘upside down’: exploring offset pricing models and article deposit terms at King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Insights, 31, 42; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.438
Max Planck Digital Library – Expression of Interest in the Large-scale Implementation of Open Access to Scholarly Journals: https://openaccess.mpg.de/2172109/ExpressionOfInterest.pdf (accessed 1 October 2018).