Institutional principles for negotiating with publishers: Difference between revisions

From Open Access Directory
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Line 45: Line 45:
** [https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cos_reports/1/ The ISU principles] themselves, October 15, 2019  
** [https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cos_reports/1/ The ISU principles] themselves, October 15, 2019  
** [https://www.lib.iastate.edu/news/faculty-senate-green-lights-negotiation-principles-unanimous-vote Article about the ISU principles], October 19, 2019
** [https://www.lib.iastate.edu/news/faculty-senate-green-lights-negotiation-principles-unanimous-vote Article about the ISU principles], October 19, 2019
= L =
* '''Ligue des Bibliothèques Européennes de Recherche''' (LIBER) (Association of European Research Libraries)
** [https://libereurope.eu/article/open-access-five-principles-for-negotiations-with-publishers/ Open Access: Five Principles for Negotiations with Publishers], September 7, 2017.


= M =
= M =

Revision as of 12:52, 16 February 2022

This list is part of the Open Access Directory.

  • This list is still under development. Every part of it may change before the official launch, including its title, URL, scope notes, and method of organization.
  • This is a list of library and university principles for negotiating with publishers. Some are from consortia rather than individual institutions.
    • When possible, include the date of public release.
  • Alphabetical by institution.



A

F

G

I

L

M

N

  • NorthEast Research Libraries Consortium (NERL) [consortium]
    • NERL demands a better deal, March 3, 2021. These are the NERL negotiating principles.
    • NERL endorsed the MIT Framework in the doc above and in a separate doc, January 21, 2021
    • This blog post has a useful table of the NERL negotiating goals, May 26, 2021.

U

  • University of Washington
    • UW apparently has similar principles but we haven’t found them yet. U Maryland mentions them in its principles (above).