Meanwhile, on the scholarly communication front, a new (co-authored) article of mine just hit the web.
Back in April I joined a bright and varied group of people at the Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) 2017 conference. Our workgroup focused on what some call “rogue solutions” to problems in scholarly communication. Those were unconventional, even illicit projects that addressed perceived challenges in copyright, distribution, etc. We had thoughtful, energetic, and at times contentious discussions, ultimately leading to a consensus presentation and report.
Our report is now live. Here’s the abstract:
What are the impacts of Sci-Hub and other rogue solutions on open access and what is the future of this approach, which may be gaining new mainstream support (noting for instance Wellcome’s recent funding of ResearchGate). What new resources should the scholarly community develop (and how) that would be useful and legal additions to our progress toward open (a new blacklist for instance, or new repositories)? This group will also integrate (to the extent possible) ideas raised by the information overload workgroup from OSI 2016.
If you’d rather read this in Twitter format, during the summer we tweeted out our conclusions.
If you’re interested in OSI, in 2016 I joined a different workgroup, one devoted to information overload. Here’s their report.