Open Science for Arts, Design and Music/Guidelines/After

Once your project is completed you can still open its content.

Turning closed access publications to Open Access retrospectively

Turning older publications legally into open access is not a mission impossible any more. This possibility is becoming part of the service portfolio of more and more publishers (e.g. Routledge). Even if it is not explicitly offered on the publisher’s due to low demand or to the relative novelty of this practice, it is worth highlighting this possibility as a source of revenue for your publisher.

If funding for this purpose is available, the authors of the publication and the publisher agree on the details of re-licensing or double-licensing and create a new contract.

+ Template renegotiation with copyright holders

+ Template co-authors

+ Template publisher

How to proceed with retrospective Open Access to publications

[relevant visual to insert here]

Similarly to many other open research workflows, this one also begins with checking the identity of the rights holder. In case of the copyrights of the publication had been transferred to the publisher (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_transfer_agreement), obtaining permission to Open Access republication is a question of agreement between the authors and the publisher → Link to the negotiation template. If you plan to give Open Access to your publication via the same publisher, you just need to sign a new contract with the licensing terms and fees involved. This specifies the details (formats, which open license, possible compromises, finances). In case of the copyrights stayed with the authors, the first step is to make a collective decision about the exact licensing terms (e.g. which Creative Commons license to choose). See also the "Checklist to produce open content" elsewhere in these guidelines. If your publication contains third-party materials, an important step before signing an Open Access publication agreement is to obtain a permission for the Open Access publication of such resources. --> Link to the template. In case the use of third-party material does not allow for open licensing of each part of your work, we recommend to use the least restrictive license applicable to your content. You can exclude third-party material from the license provision of your publication, but make sure to mark these exceptions clearly (here you can find help for this: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Marking/Creators/Marking_third_party_content). This way the rights of the original copyright holder are respected while you are free to release your own publication under an open license.

Giving Open Access to your former publications via the green route

Even if you do not have the resources to pay for an open license to your publisher, you can still pursue a green Open Access (or self-archiving) route to your former publications, through which a version of them, often the ‘author accepted manuscript (AAM)’, is legally shared in a repository. For journals, the SherpaRomeo portal gives an overview of which journal allows for which version to be shared, including possible embargo periods (in case you do not find your relevant journal listed, please inform them about this widespread practice and ask them for permission). In the case of books, green Open Access is a less established practice unfortunately. Open Access funder mandates are changing this for the better and if your research funder requires Open Access publications, you are in a very strong position to ask for permission to share a version of your manuscript Open Access via a repository. Such terms usually form a part of the contract between authors and publishers. → Link to the negotiation template.

Sustaining and openly sharing source materials and multimedia content (“as open as possible, as closed as necessary”) (images, audio and video recordings, music, artefacts)

• Check legal, ethical conditions of sharing → reuse agreement TEMPLATE (points tba)
• Prepare resources for sharing, check sensitive information, anonymisation where needed; perform selection accordingly where needed
• Consult guidelines/ good practices to organize your resources (to link guidelines here per content type)
• Even if not all your resources can be shared or shared openly, indicate deletions, closed access locations, reasons why certain parts cannot be (openly) shared in the documentation → see the ‘Levels of accessibility’ table below. Metadata (i.e. the description of your resources) should be openly available.
• Documentation and metadata: provide a rich description of your resource including provenance information, contributors, circumstances of collection, limitations, license, ‘cite as’ information etc. ( metadata, readme file or other forms of documentation)
• Select a location, i.e. where to share your resources. Ideally, this is a data repository or another hosting service with commitments for long-term archiving. → Checklist and link to select a repository for your resources.
• If you wish to publish them on multiple platforms (e.g. both on your institutional website and in a repository) make sure to interlink these platforms.

Archiving project websites

• Web archiving essentials
• Archiving-friendly formats

Sustaining and openly sharing training materials

Sustaining and openly sharing training materials

• accredit all the contributors
• use open formats
• add license
• add DOI
• archive in a repository (usually comes with a DOI)
• add contact info
• add rich metadata/contextual information to capture the training (date and circumstances of delivery, notes, instructions, aim, target groups, how to cite it etc., see an example here)
• where to make training materials available? → DARIAH Campus/Moodle/institutional website?

Sustaining and openly sharing software

• Documentation
• Using open formats for export
• Publication and archiving of research software (Zenodo, Software Heritage)