A Literature Review on Open Access Publishing (PDF)

More than 60 people attended when Dr. Mercedes Bunz discussed with representatives of the regional publishing industry in the ANALOG conference series in the Lüneburg Stadtarchiv. Thanks to everybody involved, the event resulted in an informative and smooth running evening. Read more about the outputs and results of the event soon.

The workshop (closed) is part of an ongoing series of events and research publishing for coordination and interoperability between stakeholders in the open source digital publishing research community.

In the workshop we would explore these three topics:

  •     What standards are we each using in our workflows
  •     What do these standards need to address in our workflows
  •     Looking towards interoperability in API standards for multi-format publishing

Date: 2nd and 3rd July 2014 at the Hybrid Publishing Lab, Innovation Inkubator, Leuphana University, Lüneburg Continue Reading…

mercedes-bunz-christian-heise-future-bookAn interview on the future of the book with Dr. Mercedes Bunz and Christian Heise, who are researchers in the Hybrid Publishing Lab and part of the EU project Innovation Incubator at the Centre for Digital Cultures at Leuphana University of Lüneburg. Continue Reading…

Last month, Hybrid Publishing team member Michael Dieter took part in a book sprint on book sprints, the full text of which is available to download below. Part theorization, part “how to guide,” this is a first attempt to reflect on an emerging short form method of collaborative writing.

Link to the full text: http://www.booksprints.net/2014/05/book-sprint-on-book-sprints/

Five hundred million tweets are broadcast worldwide every day on Twitter and there has been many discussions within the scientific community on how all this information can be used in social sciences, when it is only minimally trackable and disappears within the depth of cyberspace after a while. According to Scientific American, this is about to change. The microblogging platform has declared that it will make all its content – dating back to 2006 – freely available for scientific research. Melinda Wenner Moyer has written a small short piece on the impact the Tweets might have on scientific research. The article implies a positive outcome for Academia – Brian Keegan of Northeastern University, however, believes otherwise. In his commentary on the Scientific American article, he states that only six institutes will receive access, which would mean that over 99,5% of interested researchers will be denied a pass to the huge data set. He proposes other models for open data, which he believes to contain more usability than the model Twitter is proposing.

According to Wired Magazine, the UK was ranked first in two recent studies of worldwide open data policies.The UK government has also pushed for reforms of copyright and as of yesterday the proposals are law. In light of that new revised copyright law, Peter Murray-Rust will release a content-mining software on Wednesday in Vienna. The details are in his statement from the 1st of June.

In an interview with ScienceOpen, Peter Suber argues that senior faculty members should do more to support younger scholars who are interested in publishing research in open access journals.

Stanford is offering a course on Open Knowledge this September. According to the website, the course will be a global conversation on openness that cuts across borders, cultures, disciplines, and professions.

OpenCon2014, The Student and Early Researcher Conference on Open Access, Open Education, and Open Data, will be held November 15 – 17 in Washington, D.C.

“Signs – Books – Networks: From Cuneiform to Binary Code”. New Virtual Exhibition by the German Museum of Books and Writing

The GC-CUNY has recently created a new open access repository called Academic WorksJill Cirasella has taken a look at it and posted a short review.

Joanna Wild and Rowan Wilson recently published an article on the Impact of Social Sciences blog about the Creative Commons licensing framework. As there has been confusion about what the licenses mean for academic publishing in the past, their article deciphers the details of a CC BY license, which allows for remixing, tweaking and redistributing, as long as the author is credited. The article also goes into details on other CC licensing, which makes it a helpful overview of the distinctions between licenses and what each means for the readers and users as well as the authors.

 discusses the fundamentalism that pervades discussions around open access policies and business models in a blog post on scholarlykitchen. In his article he discusses open access models, asks for more rationality in the OA-debate and warns of policy mandates that potentially discourage innovation.

Tom Olijhoek posted an article in the Open Access Working Group Blog of the Open Knowledge Foundation. His article exhibits the pros and cons of open access publishing and gives a good overview to the state of open access publishing right now. He then argues for fully implemented open access and lays open how different the costs for publishing are depending on the publishers. He ends the article with a call for action and has opened a joined spreadsheet which is supposed to lay open all charges by publishers.

In a post on f1000research.com Eva Amsen looks at the meaning and history of open peer review. Her defining article includes a timeline and benefits of open peer review and is part of a series on the principles of the f1000 research community.

Evgeny Morozov criticizes Google in a recent article on the “right to be forgotten” debate. Google’s Eric Schmidt recently answered the “right to be forgotten” claims with his own, saying that people also had a “right to know”. Morozov, however,believes the “right to know” translates into a “right to profit from your personal information”. Read the full article here.

Following the great example of the Austrian Science Fund the Swiss National Research Foundation will fund the publication of Open Access monographs beginning on July 1st. Apparently this forthcoming shift from granting printing subsidies to supporting digital editions was not received positively by many stakeholders in the Swiss scientific community as Caspar Hirschi discusses in his thoughtful NZZ article. However, creating funding opportunities for publishing books in Open Access is an important step in the right direction. This leaves me wondering when the German Research Foundation and other research funding organizations in Germany will finally introduce similar funding instruments.

On Thursday and Friday (22-23 May), the international conference “Off the Press: Electronic Publishing in the Arts”, organized by our friends from the Digital Publishing Toolkit initiative, will take place in Rotterdam (NL).

Off the Press

The conference starts at the renowned Museum Bojimans van Beuningen with the sessions “Today’s Book Publishing” and “One thousand and one Publishing Workflows” (both featuring experts from all over the globe), followed by an introduction to the Digital Publishing toolkit and showcases by international artists/designers and publishers.

During the evening session at the legendary WORM, artists and designers will present their own practices and approaches to digital publishing that both take advantage of and question the current modes of content production and dissemination.

The second day begins with three parallel workshops called “Paper to Code: Transforming the Future of Reading”, “Electronic Publishing Workflows: (Multi)Markdown & Pandoc” (you’ll need a separate ticket for these workshops) and “Superglue: Reshaping the Web?” (free). The event is completed by the session “Underground e-publishing” and the “Bazaar”, in which a number of artists, publishers and other practitioners of electronic publishing will showcase their projects in an informal way, looking forward to meeting you!

For tickets and more information on the whole event, please visit: http://digitalpublishingtoolkit.org/

Christof Schöch of SocialScienceSpace looks at five collaborative writing tools for academics and how they fit the needs of the modern researcher.

The reviewed tools range from the “lowest common denominator” Google Drive to FidusWriter, a tool loaded with features for academics.

You can read the full review here.

What are some of the tools you use for your collaborative writing projects? Share your thoughts and links in the comments.

Leuphana_Analog_3_IIIAm 4. Juni 2014 ab 17 Uhr findet im Stadtarchiv Lüneburg die Veranstaltung Analog III: “Digital oder Gedruckt? Die Zukunft der Holzmedien” statt. Im Rahmen dieser Veranstaltung sprechen wir mit Vertretern und Gästen aus der Region über die Veränderungen im Verlagswesen durch die Digitalen Medien:

Elektronische Alternativen stellen das gedruckte Buch vor Herausforderungen, Online-Shops die lokalen Ladengeschäfte. Das klassische Druckgewerbe gerät in Bedrängnis, aber Technologien wie Print-On-Demand bieten neue Chancen. ANALOG III präsentiert verschiedene Antworten auf diese tiefgreifenden Veränderungen und erkundet im Dialog mit Medienexperten der Region den Status-Quo regionaler Verlagswelten.

Gewinnen Sie tiefe Einblicke in die Hybridisierung der Verlagswelt: Das Team des Kompetenztandems „Hybrid Publishing Lab“ des Centre for Digital Cultures an der Leuphana Univiersität Lüneburg freut sich auf eine Keynote, ein Podiumsgespräch und einen geselligen Abend mit Ihnen. Melden Sie sich jetzt hier für die Veranstaltung an!

Geert LovinkIn todays blogpost for the interview series with our tandem partners we speak with Geert Lovink, founding director of the Institute of Network Cultures, HvA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. He is also the founder of Internet projects such as nettime and fibreculture.

Julia Rehfeldt: Can you tell us something about your field of research and what you are currently working on at the Hybrid Publishing Lab? Continue Reading…

Reverse Engineering Digital Methods2. Workshop der AG Daten und Netzwerke

Centre for Digital Cultures
Leuphana Universität Lüneburg
Sülztorstr. 21-25 (Post)

Mit der jüngsten Konjunktur der Digital Humanities und der damit einhergehenden methodologischen, heuristischen und förderpolitischen Neuorientierung scheinen die Geistes- und Kulturwissenschaften nun endgültig im digitalen Zeitalter angekommen zu sein. Dabei sind die Konturen des „digitalen” Forschungsparadigmas noch weithin unscharf. Dies stellt auch für die Medienwissenschaften eine Herausforderung dar, die sich an der Schnittstelle von Geistes- und Kulturwissenschaften einerseits und Sozialwissenschaften andererseits mit der Frage konfrontiert sehen: Welche neuen Wege der Forschung können mit digitalen Medien beschritten werden und welche neuen Erkenntnisse zu Tage gefördert? Aber auch: Welche neuen Kompetenzen müssen Medienwissenschaftler_innen erwerben, um digital forschend tätig zu sein? Zugleich drängt sich die Frage nach der medialen Bedingtheit des digitalen Forschungsparadigmas auf: Auf welche Weise strukturieren technische Infrastrukturen und digitale Forschungspraktiken das Wissen, welches aus ihnen hervorgeht? Continue Reading…

When working with new digital media and the internet, one always presumes free and open means just that – easily accessible information, equally available to those that use the technologies. The reality, of course, is different. In the past weeks, there have been discussions evolving around the FCC (Federal Communications Commission), which released a statement to introduce new rules that would allow ISPs to charge companies a premium rate for content, or an Internet “fast lane”. This would mean that certain companies with a larger financial backdrop can pay to have their sites working faster, while non-profit internet sites would neccessarily be slower and less accessible. This obviously sparked a heated conversation on net neutrality. The concept of net neutrality was originally introduced by Tim Wu, 41, a law professor at Columbia University, and it basically states that “The cable and telephone companies that control important parts of the plumbing of the Internet shouldn’t restrict how the rest of us use it.”

Jeff Sommer spoke to Mr. Wu for a New York times article, in which he tries to find out what exactly net neutrality might mean in future. The full article is available here.

Last Monday the FCC chairman Tom Wheeler responded to the waves of criticism and revised the proposal, as Roger Yu stated on USA Today. The other FCC commissioners will vote on the revised proposal tomorrow.

The meeting should be eventful, as grassroot activists have called upon the public to join them at the FCC headquarters to enforce their claim on netneutrality. Marguerite Reardon did a write-up for Cnet on the protesters side after interviewing Becky Bond, political director at CREDO. The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) has also called upon the public to take action to defend net neutrality.