Preservation A Publishers Perspective Carol Richman Director of Licensing SAGE Publications

1
PreservationA Publishers PerspectiveCarol
RichmanDirector of LicensingSAGE Publications
2
Why should we care?

• These timescales of many decades, even
  centuries, contrast with the typical 5-year
  lifetime for computing hardware and digital
  media A Fresh Look at the Reliability of
  Longterm Digital Storage. Baker, Mary, et al..
  EuroSys '06, April 18-21, 2006

3
Why Care?

• Preservation Digital information is impermanent
• Publisher Safety
• to insure ongoing availability of your content
• Librarians Custodianship
• to insure continuity of the record of scientific
  progress
• Very long view epistemology, history of science
  and culture

4
What Should be Preserved?

• Scholarly content
• Research materials
• Web-based, digitally born content

5
Preservation options

• National archives
• Dutch National library (KB)
• British Library
• NIH PubMedCentral?
• Library of Congress?
• Institutional Repositories
• Community-based Archives
• Product Solution Archives

6
Summary Table
7
SummaryHow Repositories Differ

• Stated purpose
• Dark v. light
• Complete backfile v. current only
• Deposits
• Who author v. publisher
• What manuscripts v. final work
• Why voluntary v. mandated
• Rights transfer
• Access control
• Costs

8
PreservationA SAGE Example
9
SAGE and Preservation

• SAGEs commitment to customers and partners
• Critical to society arrangements
• Essential for new e-sales (consortia single
  institutions) Perpetual access
• Business continuity
• Long-term preservation
• We are not preservation experts!

10

SAGE and Preservation

• Dutch KB
• CLOCKSS
• LOCKSS
• Portico
• Library of Congress
• British Library

11
How we do it

• Provide details of digital availability
• Provide sample of content
• Provide details of content format (DTD)
• Send all backfile for loading
• Set up content flow for ongoing content

12
Not just a technical exercise!

• SAGE and its trigger event. . .

13
GRAFT -

• Discontinued title due to lack of subscription
  base
• Opted to release to archives Portico, CLOCKSS,
  and the KB
• Portico took lead on releasing the archive first
  and assuming responsibility for DOIs
• Portico only archive currently able to handle
  DOIs
• SAGE assigned DOIs to Portico for re-deposit to
  CrossRef
• CLOCKSS released weeks after Dutch KB yet to
  release

14
Challenges - DOIs

• Archives (Portico) had not had to deposit for
  released content before no precedence set
• Under current CrossRef rules, Portico is the
  owner of the DOIs. Portico is working with the
  CrossRef Board to determine the best method for
  other archives to take advantage of the DOI work
  that Portico has done.
• Multiple resolution does not currently work so
  only Portico will have pointers from CrossRef
• All DOIs had not been deposited for content no
  precedence set for how to handle this
• Some articles had not DOIs who should assign
  and under what DOI prefix?
• CrossRef had to create working group to create
  guidelines for how to deal with the release of
  content to archives (SAGE involved in working
  group)

15
Market Reaction

• SAGE and Portico released press releases and
  posted to list serves
• Librarians took positively and negatively
• Positive
• System appears to work for the release from dark
  archive
• Content remains available in perpetuity
• SAGE acted responsibly by releasing journal to
  archive
• DOIs will remain active for content minimal
  confusion
• Negative
• SAGE ceased publication on a journal

16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
Thank You!Contact info carol.richman_at_sagepub.c
omwww.sagepub.com