Velocity of Content - Copyright Clearance Center https://www.copyright.com Rights Licensing Expert Thu, 26 May 2022 14:32:28 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://www.copyright.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/cropped-favicon-512x512-1-32x32.png Velocity of Content - Copyright Clearance Center https://www.copyright.com 32 32 CCC as Part of a More Connected Scholarly Community at SSP 2022 https://www.copyright.com/blog/ccc-part-of-a-more-connected-scholarly-community-at-ssp-2022/ Thu, 26 May 2022 12:44:48 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37996 CCC is thrilled to be sponsoring and attending this year’s Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) Annual Meeting in Chicago, Illinois from June 1-3.

The post CCC as Part of a More Connected Scholarly Community at SSP 2022 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
CCC is thrilled to be sponsoring and attending this year’s Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) Annual Meeting in Chicago, Illinois from June 1-3. True to the theme of “Building a More Connected Scholarly Community,” this in-person event will bring together academics, funders, librarians, publishers, and more from across the globe. As a Gold Sponsor, CCC looks forward to connecting with our peers in the scholarly publishing community during a series of breaks throughout the event, and three different sessions across the three days. We’re particularly excited this year to be collaborating with our new colleagues at Ringgold, who will be at the show at Booth 312. 

On Day 1, CCC will be hosting Open Access Agreement Modeling: What Does it Take to Construct a Sustainable Deal? Presented by CCC’s Senior Director, Information and Content Solutions, Jamie Carmichael and RightsLink for Scientific Communications Product Manager, Shannon Reville, this session will provide an overview of how publishers are currently modeling OA agreements and discuss emerging best practices, technology and tips learned along the way. This will be an interactive session where participants are encouraged to share examples from their own experiences and discuss practical tools to solve these challenges. Attendees will walk away with actionable steps to better prepare for data-driven negotiations to construct agreements that are built for success. 

Day 2 will see CCC’s Jamie Carmichael joined by Heather Staines, Director of Community Engagement & Senior Consultant, Delta Think; Sara Rouhi, Director of Strategic Partnerships, PLOS; and Curtis Brundy, Associate University Librarian for Scholarly Communications and Collections, Iowa State University; for Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about the Most Common Open Access Agreements. This panel will review key elements of the most common OA agreements, together with “breaking news” insights from a study examining the extent of “transformation” seen to date in the research community. Panelists will share the importance of good data, open communication, and transparency in the publishing process. Attendees will walk away with a better understanding of how to approach the most common deals, how to better prepare for these negotiations, and to operationalize the end result.   

The final day will feature CCC’s Charles Hemenway, Publisher Solutions Director, participating in SSP’s Preview Session The Future of OA Agreement Modeling and Analysis, giving a preview of what’s next from CCC. Join us for the first look at a new market offering for the scholarly publishing community. 

You can see the entire SSP program here and learn more about the event here. We look forward to seeing you there!  

The post CCC as Part of a More Connected Scholarly Community at SSP 2022 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Optimizing Research to Drive Food Innovation and Organizational Success https://www.copyright.com/blog/optimizing-research-to-drive-food-innovation-and-organizational-success/ Wed, 25 May 2022 08:00:59 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37959 Recently, I had the pleasure of joining CCC and a panel of leading R&D experts including Amenah Ibrahim, principle of… Read more

The post Optimizing Research to Drive Food Innovation and Organizational Success appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Recently, I had the pleasure of joining CCC and a panel of leading R&D experts including Amenah Ibrahim, principle of AI R&D Project Management Services, LLC., and Jeff George, SVP of Corporate R&D for Hain Celestial, for a discussion on the state of research in food and beverage organizations. Here are some of our key insights on how research best practices can help streamline innovation, discovery, compliance, collaboration and responsiveness across the R&D organization.

Meeting the daily evolution of consumer trends and keeping pace with disruptive innovation is the perennial challenge for food and other consumer package goods (CPG) companies. Big and small, new and old, the challenge is the same: how to discover key research, transform it into winning, breakthrough initiatives, and do it collaboratively and efficiently.

Before considering the type of research to be done, the first step for any R&D team is to define what innovation means to them. For instance, is it a short-term or long-term goal? Is it meant to be disruptive?

I would argue that the real value of researchers in corporate R&D is directly reflected in the value of the information they can provide. There are different formats that research can take when it comes to innovation, especially in food and beverage or personal care products. Before setting sights on breakthrough innovation to address unmet consumer needs, we recommend that R&D teams start by making sure they have answers to questions in a few key areas:

  • Consumer research: What do internal teams already know about consumer preferences? What are the most current consumer behaviors relevant to your company, including pricing information?
  • Competitive research: What else is happening in the category? What innovation has been successful in other companies? What innovations have not gotten traction or failed?
  • Internal research: What are other teams across the organization currently working on? What past R&D successes are repeatable? What internal learnings are available about what should be avoided?

With R&D often siloed by brand or teams in large CPG companies, one of the biggest challenges can be identifying institutional knowledge and simply knowing what other types of research are currently in process. After considering these sources, if a gap and exciting incremental opportunity are identified that solves a consumer problem, this commonly leads to:

  • Scientific literature research: What does the current patent landscape tell you about what has already been done in this area? What articles from scientific journals that have been peer reviewed and published are available to support your current hypothesis?

The next important question is, how do you vet your research? While a quick Google search might be enough to provide some level of initial inspiration, it is crucial to base the direction of your next R&D project on validated data and information from credible sources.

One way is to develop a robust open innovation network of subject matter experts to supplement the internal expertise of the company and bring high credibility and often value-added services.

Another way to vet your research and save on countless hours of searching is to start with credible sources in the first place. For example, I was recently asked about the ability to vitamin fortify alcoholic beverages. A Google search produced an article that seemed to clearly outline how this is not an approved option per the FDA. As a simple step to determine the veracity of this information, I made sure to go to fda.gov to locate the article directly from the source. Good, but is that simple vetting enough?

That depends on how researchers plan on using published information. Are they planning to reuse published articles when collaborating with other researchers? Are researchers going to use these articles to support claims to the FDA, or to promote the functional benefits of their product to potential retailers? When responding to officials during a food crisis, teams will scramble for the right information and almost certainly will share that information externally. That is where proper vetting becomes critical.

“We get so enamored with finding the answer we’re looking for in our research that perhaps we don’t always do the due diligence. When we do acquisitions, you have 30 people visit the site to do due diligence. I don’t think we apply the same discipline to information.”

Just what does that due diligence entail? Here are some questions to consider:

  • Does your organization have existing subscriptions to relevant trade journals and consumer publications?
  • Does your company have the right resources and tools in place to make those publications readily available to all researchers throughout the organization?
  • Are employees considering copyright and what rights are available when reusing or collaborating with that content?
  • How do you broaden the scope beyond your existing subscriptions to get the most robust yet efficient search possible?
  • What additional considerations should be given when sharing published content outside the organization?

To hear more from our panel discussion on how to optimize your research to drive food innovation and organizational success, access the complete session recording here.

Learn more about how CCC’s RightFind technology and licensing solutions can support your food company by delivering fast and comprehensive access to content, accelerating response times and promoting compliant collaboration to drive innovation.

The post Optimizing Research to Drive Food Innovation and Organizational Success appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Spotify, Comedians, ‘Tasini’ & Me https://www.copyright.com/blog/spotify-comedians-tasini-and-me/ Tue, 24 May 2022 08:43:26 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37935 New media technologies – in this case, audio streaming services – bring up new licensing challenges. Here's our deep dive.

The post Spotify, Comedians, ‘Tasini’ & Me appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>

We have all seen how an appropriate and well-timed joke can sometimes influence even grim tyrants . . . The most violent tyrants put up with their clowns and fools, though these often made them the butt of open insults.

—Desiderius Erasmus, Praise of Folly

As it was said of  medieval and early modern jesters – you know, the guys with the multicolored, bell-laden hats in noble courts – I think nearly everything should be potentially on the table when it comes to being the target of comedy. Of course, in return for providing the entertainment and what enlightened despots said were some necessary reminders of the need for humility, the jesters were provided with room and board in the castle (as well as the privilege of speaking truth to power without the inconvenience of losing their heads). We do things a little differently now, but the workings of the quid and the pro quo are not all that much different.

In our time of the lucrative domain of streaming audio platforms, it appears that many modern day comedians are not happy. In recent months, for example, Pandora has been sued by comedians (or their estates, in some cases) over licensing issues.

The core copyright question in dispute here seems to involve the need for two licenses to stream the performances of the jokes – one to use (and for these purposes, pay for) the underlying composition – what the creator wrote – and the second to use the recording itself – that is, the performance of the jokes (regardless of who it is who performed/recorded them). It is important to realize that, although these two rights pertain to the same copyrighted work, they are not the same right. For many years, these two rights have been recognized as distinct – as Ian Poritz, in his “Deep Dive” piece for Bloomberg, phrases it, the problem is one joke, two copyrights. This is analogous to two rights in music – the right of the composer to control the music/lyrics underlying a particular recording (that is, the composition) and the right of the performer to control the performance itself (what the industry refers to as the sound recording).  The distinction in the rights has come up most often in music because of the frequency with which the two rights are in fact held by different parties – the composer usually retains the right to the composition (including the right to license it to multiple performers) while the performer’s record label usually retains the rights in the sound recording.  However, even where both rights are held by the same person – and this is common in the case of recorded stand-up comedy (and only rarely in music, as Taylor Swift has finally accomplished, but only after litigation and conflict) – the two rights can be and frequently are licensed and otherwise managed separately.

As streaming audio services are relatively new, and newly popular, some uncertainty about what rights are implicated in streaming audio (whether music or spoken word) and who has to pay whom —and how much — is understandable. In the history of copyright, however, this is not the first time that new media technologies has led to novel disputes about licensing. We don’t have to go back to the age of Scott Joplin and the player-piano for our examples. Two good ones from only 20 years ago come right to mind:

  • New York Times Co. v. Tasini (2001) The “Tasini” case is a relatively famous (in copyright circles at least) legal dispute, ultimately decided by the US Supreme Court back in 2001. It revolved around a particular reuse by the New York Times of freelancer-written materials and whether that reuse was authorized. The Times created and distributed (sold) CD-ROMs of materials which had been first published in the newspaper. There was no question that the paper had certain redistribution rights in the freelancer-written material as originally published (on paper and the then-traditional microform); however, CD-ROM collections or compilations of digitized textual works were relatively new at the time, and the High Court found that the paper had not acquired the rights for that reuse. Although The Times had in fact acquired one right in the freelancers’ works, it was found not to have acquired the second right that it thought it had – the one that it needed to include those works in the CD-ROMs.
  • Random House v. Rosetta Books (2001): This was a New York case in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals which had to do with old author/publisher contracts, literally sitting in a file drawer somewhere, and the then-new and emerging technology of e-books, which were just starting to enjoy broader market success (and dramatic success a few years later). The court found that, while Random House did in fact have the right to publish certain authors’ books in paper form (both hardcover and paperback), it did not have the second set of rights it thought it had – the right to publish those books in electronic form. (The defendant Rosetta Books was a second publisher, which DID expressly acquire the electronic publishing rights from the same authors who had sold the paper-publishing rights to Random House.) The moral of that story, as taught in copyright classes around the US, is that old agreements may not cover new uses, and that one ought not presume that the needed rights are in hand unless the actual text of a valid agreement actually says so.

A personal vignette: After the Tasini decision came down, many writers (myself included) received polite little mailings from publishers with whom we had worked. In effect, these said (in so many words), “We love you guys, we’re one big happy family, yada yada yada . . . . Would you mind signing this?”  This was a rights transfer request for subsequent electronic use. (I signed it.)

I don’t know how the current comedy brouhaha will come out; and I’d guess that neither does anyone else. It’s just too early to pull out the ol’ crystal ball. But I do think we’re in a place where new uses imply the need for new licenses (or perhaps I should call them “unexpected” licenses) under copyright. And, although we can poke fun at the discomfort it is causing, in the end, it’s no laughing matter.

The post Spotify, Comedians, ‘Tasini’ & Me appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Publishing & Antitrust https://www.copyright.com/blog/publishing-antitrust/ Mon, 23 May 2022 09:45:46 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37928 As one by one, publishers disappear, is it possible (or even inevitable) that competition in trade book publishing is on its way to becoming extinct?

The post Publishing & Antitrust appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
On May 15, as part of the 2022 BIO Conference, cosponsored with the Leon Levy Center for Biography, I hosted a panel discussion on the future of publishing.

In November 2020, Penguin Random House announced plans to purchase rival Simon & Schuster from Viacom CBS for more than $2 billion.

Penguin Random House, the largest book publisher in the United States, is owned by the German media conglomerate Bertelsmann, a private, family-owned multinational corporation that is one of the world’s largest media conglomerates and which includes the BMG music label. Combining with Simon & Schuster, the US’s third largest publisher, would create a fearsome “book behemoth,” as the New York Times noted at the time.

The PRH/S&S merger immediately raised the possibility that the US Department of Justice would seek to block it on antitrust grounds. On November 2, 2021, the US Dept. of Justice filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to prevent the proposed acquisition.

Click below to listen to the latest episode of the Velocity of Content podcast

Publishing & Antitrust

“If the world’s largest book publisher is permitted to acquire one of its biggest rivals, it will have unprecedented control over this important industry,” said US Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The BIO Conference panel considered the pending Penguin Random House acquisition of Simon & Schuster; the antitrust case brought to stop it; and the ongoing concerns over industry consolidation.

Joining Kenneally were Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild and Authors Guild Foundation; Christopher L. Sagers, the James A. Thomas Professor of Law at Cleveland State University, specializing in antitrust law; and Andrew Albanese, Senior Writer at Publishers Weekly and the author of The Battle of $9.99: How Apple, Amazon and the “Big Six” Publishers Changed the E-Book Business Overnight.

“The DOJ’s complaint shows that it really understands that authors inevitably lose income when there’s limited competition for their work.  That, in turn, impacts the reading public, because fewer important books are written, simply because at some point, authors can’t afford to write these kinds of books,” said Mary Rasenberger.

Each year, BIO – the Biographers International Organization – welcomes biographers, editors, agents, publishers, and publicity professionals to a weekend-long program on all aspects of the biographer’s craft. Speakers include Pulitzer Prize winners and bestselling authors.

The post Publishing & Antitrust appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
US Book Show Focus on Libraries https://www.copyright.com/blog/us-book-show-focus-on-libraries/ Fri, 20 May 2022 13:34:21 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37904 After a successful launch last year, the online-only U.S. Book Show returns May 24-26.

The post US Book Show Focus on Libraries appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
After a successful launch last year, the online-only U.S. Book Show returns May 24-26. Publishers Weekly developed the virtual trade book show after BookExpo closed in December 2020.

In a two-part program within the program on the show’s first day, Libraries Are Essential will “look at the state of libraries as vital institutions in our communities, in our democracy, and of course in the reading enterprise,” says Andrew Albanese, PW senior writer and show co-host.

The program will conclude with a keynote U.S. Representative Jamie Raskin, (D-MD), author of Unthinkable: Trauma, Truth, and the Trials of American Democracy.

Click below to listen to the latest episode of the Velocity of Content podcast

US Book Show Focus on Libraries

“In the morning, we will consider the rise of book bans and other legislation targeting the freedom to read,” Albanese tells me.

“In the afternoon, we will focus on issues affecting libraries—including how libraries are handling digital content and the state of the library e-book market; the safety and state of library workers; and finally a terrific discussion about leadership in libraries in a post-COVID world.”

The post US Book Show Focus on Libraries appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
How CCC and Aries Collaborate to Streamline and Improve OA Workflows for Authors https://www.copyright.com/blog/how-ccc-and-aries-collaborate-to-streamline-and-improve-oa-workflows-for-authors/ Thu, 19 May 2022 08:12:53 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37867 The transition to Open Access (OA) business models and subsequent funding mandates has introduced many challenges for publishers, including an additional level of complexity to their publishing workflows.

The post How CCC and Aries Collaborate to Streamline and Improve OA Workflows for Authors appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
The transition to Open Access (OA) business models and subsequent funding mandates have introduced many challenges for publishers, including an additional level of complexity to their publishing workflows. One significant outcome of these new mandates was the need for publishers to manage various article processing charges (APCs), which lead to the development of Copyright Clearance Center’s (CCC) to develop RightsLink for Scientific Communications (RLSC). However, early in the development of RLSC, CCC determined that in order to offer publishers a truly integrated workflow solution, we needed to partner with other key players working with authors and reviewers.

Enter Aries Systems

To incorporate APC estimation, collection, and management directly within existing publishing workflows, Aries Systems and CCC announced their strategic collaboration to integrate RLSC with Editorial Manager® (EM) and ProduXion Manager® (PM), the leading peer review and production tracking systems, in 2015. Since its release, this seamless solution streamlines the process for both the submitting author and the publisher and delivers value to all stakeholders in the open scholarly publishing space to support growth in the OA market.

Continued Evolution and Focus on the Author

As market forces began to shift the focus to not only managing individual author APCs, but to supporting new OA institutional agreements, CCC and Aries continued to collaborate to solve for this need. In January 2021, publishers using RLSC could now inform authors of available OA publication funding throughout the manuscript lifecycle, starting with submission.

To support the successful and sustainable transition to OA, increased education and visibility should be offered to authors in regard to their funding options throughout the manuscript lifecycle. Authors have long struggled with the administrative burden required to identify, secure, and manage eligible OA publication funding from various sources. Heightened awareness increases publisher compliance with many transformative agreements including Read and Publish, many of which set expectations that manuscripts meeting the terms of the agreements will be published OA without fail.

CCC and Aries make it possible to connect author affiliation to funding eligibility early in the manuscript lifecycle, providing an important missing link between the various workflow stakeholders involved in the manuscript submission process – an element that is often identified as a major pain point by those working in open scholarly publishing.

Collaboration is the Key

The arrangement between CCC and Aries is not just a software integration. Our teams work closely together to solicit and share publisher feedback, participate in community discussions and events, and identify ways that we can continue to provide a first-rate user experience and seamless end-to-end workflow for authors and publications. We are dedicated to listening to publishers, funders, authors,

and other key stakeholders, and tightly collaborating to ensure our combined offering continues to meet the ever-evolving needs of the scholarly publishing ecosystem.

The post How CCC and Aries Collaborate to Streamline and Improve OA Workflows for Authors appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
How Centralizing Information Resources Can Drive Efficiencies and Increase Compliance https://www.copyright.com/blog/how-centralizing-information-resources-can-drive-efficiencies-and-increase-compliance/ Wed, 18 May 2022 08:14:28 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37843 Decentralized spending for information resources often goes unnoticed and, in terms of use, employees may not be aware of what they can and can’t do with purchased content.

The post How Centralizing Information Resources Can Drive Efficiencies and Increase Compliance appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
No business, small or large, can survive for long without controlling and monitoring purchases. Business-critical and high-value products and services purchased by an organization are often scrutinized. However, decentralized spending for information resources often goes unnoticed and, in terms of use, employees may not be aware of what they can and can’t do with purchased content.

Centralizing Information Resource Spend

When enterprises implement minimum spending thresholds for approvals and purchase orders, any orders below the set limit (which can be thousands of dollars) do not require oversight checks or authorization. Individuals can also purchase information resources and memberships through personal expense claims or procurement cards. Both can lead to a lack of detail in reporting which in turn can make these transactions difficult to identify and classify correctly. Furthermore, when it comes to information resources, this makes it difficult to track who has purchased what and who should have access.

Many organizations don’t rush to action when centralizing subscription-based resources. The task of consolidating and capturing these smaller orders can seem overwhelming, and the investment in doing so can seem counterproductive. The use of a specialist information management partner can be a surprisingly efficient, simple, and easy-to-implement solution.

A specialist information management partner can help with:

  • Increasing spend management and control
  • Maximizing return on content investment
  • Improving visibility and accessibility of existing content assets
  • Refining process efficiencies and increasing productivity of personnel
  • Reducing risk of reputational and financial damage from non-compliance with suppliers’ terms of use
  • Visualizing content spend to support digital transformation and sustainability in the supply chain
What is the solution?

Internal solutions might exist, but using a specialist partner with expertise, supplier relationships, tools, and processes that maximize efficiencies can be much more effective and practical. After an audit and implementation of tools and processes, the procurement of information resource acquisition is organized, centralized, and fully managed – enabling your organization to maximize its return on those investments.

What about compliance?

Despite efforts to educate employees about compliance, copyright infringement isn’t always top of mind. According to Outsell’s 2020 Information Usage and Consumption Study, 73% of all respondents believe there are serious risks and implications to copyright infringement but 47% are unaware of their organization’s copyright policy or unsure of its details.

With information resources consolidated and through a streamlined purchasing process, it becomes much easier to access content, monitor autorenewal clauses, preserve access to content assets when employees leave an organization, and create an opportunity to improve copyright awareness and support collaboration across the organization.

Should customers need to reuse, reproduce, or collaborate using published content, a specialist agent can introduce customers to partners, such as CCC, who can provide solutions that simplify compliant collaboration and educational resources that focus on the importance of copyright.

CCC solutions that simplify compliance provide an efficient way to manage and collaborate on content. Additionally, Px Compliance (by Prenax) sources, hosts, and summarizes all supplier terms into convenient One Page Summaries which are made available to subscribers through a dashboard. Immediately, subscribers can understand the limitations of use, attest that they have read and understood the terms, and the company demonstrably encourages compliance while being mindful of cost-effective solutions and diversion of time from other projects.

The post How Centralizing Information Resources Can Drive Efficiencies and Increase Compliance appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Preprints, Retractions & The Scientific Record https://www.copyright.com/blog/preprints-retractions-the-scientific-record/ Mon, 16 May 2022 13:10:38 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37829 A peer-reviewed article published this month in PLOS ONE has examined what happens in the scientific record when journal-published versions of articles are retracted in cases of research previously available on preprint servers.

The post Preprints, Retractions & The Scientific Record appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Science traditionally advances in two steps. The first is taken in a laboratory or library, the second when sharing the results.

Online, digital publishing of so-called preprints has quickened the beat tremendously, closing the gap between researcher and reader.

For the most part, we are better off, with the accelerated development of treatments and vaccines for COVID-19 as the model example. Yet when research is retracted, the record may not reflect the reversal.

Click below to listen to the latest episode of the Velocity of Content podcast

Preprints, Retractions & The Scientific Record

A peer-reviewed article published this month in PLOS ONE has examined what happens in the scientific record when journal-published versions of articles are retracted in cases of research previously available on preprint servers.

Michele Avissar-Whiting, editor-in-chief of Research Square, a leading preprint provider, found a reassuringly small number of such retractions.

However, she also says that inconsistencies in publisher responses pose a threat to the scholarly record and to scientific integrity.

“Look, retractions are still a contentious thing. I think some of the best work being done in scientific integrity is the work to destigmatize the retraction – not just normalize it but reward the admission of fault and the active correction of the record by authors,” says Avissar-Whiting.

“The more we can do in this area, I think the more we’ll see authors taking responsibility,” she tells me.

The post Preprints, Retractions & The Scientific Record appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Defending the Freedom to Read https://www.copyright.com/blog/defending-the-freedom-to-read/ Fri, 13 May 2022 13:14:43 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37759 Publishers, authors, and bookseller groups have joined the Unite Against Book Bans campaign The American Library Association this week announced… Read more

The post Defending the Freedom to Read appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Publishers, authors, and bookseller groups have joined the Unite Against Book Bans campaign

The American Library Association this week announced that more than 25 major organizations, including a host of publishers and author and bookseller groups, have joined its Unite Against Book Bans campaign, an effort to help communities defend the freedom to read.

Launched in April, the group aims to raise awareness about the surge in book bans and related legislation emerging around the country, reports Andrew AlbanesePublishers Weekly senior writer.

Click below to listen to the latest episode of the Velocity of Content podcast

Defending the Freedom to Read

Among the groups declaring their support for the effort are the American Booksellers Association Free Expression Initiative, the American Federation of Teachers, as well as major publishers such as Macmillan, Penguin Random House, and Simon & Schuster.

“Awareness is a big part of the mission—but you’d have to be pretty out of the loop not to be aware of what’s going on here,” says Albanese.

“Awareness alone does not protect your freedom to read. This is one of those things where you need to show up—show up to your school board and library board and city council meetings, and get involved,” he tells me.

The post Defending the Freedom to Read appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
How Collaboration Makes for Innovation https://www.copyright.com/blog/how-collaboration-makes-for-innovation/ Thu, 12 May 2022 08:11:05 +0000 https://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=37682 In the accelerating transition to Open Access, The Microbiology Society has concentrated great attention on making strides to streamline author workflow from submission and review to publication.

The post How Collaboration Makes for Innovation appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
In the accelerating transition to Open Access, The Microbiology Society has concentrated great attention on making strides to streamline author workflow from submission and review to publication.

This effort has led us to forge various transformative agreements with our institutional partners as well as to break down internal silos – with production, editorial, and sales working together more closely than ever.

Such innovation through collaboration continues to push not only us but all scholarly publishers forward on the Open Access journey.

That was my message to the OA publishing community when I was a guest recently on CCC’s OA Innovations Seminar webcast series.

This was an important opportunity for me to share best practices for Open Access publishing. In the UK and across Europe especially, as well as in North America, publishers and their partners can and should learn from each other about sustainable approaches, program innovations, and tried-and-true “best practices.”

Through community initiatives such as the OA Switchboard and the Society Publishers Coalition, The Microbiology Society is working to develop solutions for the entire scholarly publishing community. As a partner with CCC, we leverage the robust capabilities of RightsLink for Scientific Communications to allow for a frictionless Open Access publishing program.

Perhaps the most dauting challenge our authors face today is accessing the funds available from their institutions to offset OA-related publication fees.

Not long ago, a prominent Microbiology Society member told me that submitting papers for publication had become one of the worst parts of a researcher’s job.

Of course, this was disconcerting to hear. As a smaller publisher, it is imperative for us to meet the needs and expectations of the individuals and organizations we work with.

Our authors understandably want to focus on their research rather than lost time caught up in institutional paperwork.

Taking this feedback to heart, we have sought to remove as much of the administrative burden from authors as possible, helping them to avoid what I call the “hornets’ nest of APCs in the wild.”

The “touch-free” workflow at the center of CCC’s RightsLink for Scientific Communications platform is a good example of well-designed technology that lets authors focus on their research, not APC management. The Microbiology Society encourages institutions we work with to enable RightsLink’s auto-approval functionalities; then, RightsLink seamlessly removes authors from the funding workflow.

Change does not happen without some pain, and the shift to Open Access is no different.

CCC “gets” OA and “gets” publishing. Other guests in the Innovation seminar series will explore critical success factors and provide practical case studies for improving the author experience; creating data-driven workflows; and optimizing stakeholder communications and collaboration.

Our job as publishers is to make the publication process easy and efficient. That job has not changed since The Microbiology Society was founded in 1945 — even if our publishing business model has changed beyond recognition.

The post How Collaboration Makes for Innovation appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>