Many "Green" publishers do not allow the use of the published pdf file for depositing in OA Repositories. What they allow to be used instead is the "author's-version". This can go by many names, but it means the final version produced by the author, with all peer-review and other editorial changes in place in the text, but before layout and minor editing changes by publishers.

In other words, this is the final version as produced and approved by the author before it leaves the author's hands. The level of additional editing and subsequent changes introduced by the publisher varies widely. Some insist on camera-ready copy, in which case the author's final version is exactly the same as that which is published. Others introduce type-face changes, and modifications to layout, etc. Other publishers claim to carry out more substantial changes after it has left the author's hands, but this is rarely recognised or identified by the authors' themselves and by report, in many cases would be strongly resented.

Leaving aside the level and type of subsequent editing introduced by the publisher, the author's-version, therefore, shows the final version of the text as written and approved by the author. As such, this seems a perfectly acceptable version for dissemination and use. However, there can be problems.

Many authors do not retain an ‘e-copy’ of their final version. For their own future use and reference they use the copy published in the journal. An understandable practice that originates from the time of paper journal publication and reprints for authors’ own use. This practice means, however, that the author's-version is often unavailable, and leaves the author unable to deposit an eprint of their article.

It can prove very difficult to track down a version as written by the author. If the author does not have a copy, one possible source is the editor of the journal. A number of academic editors keep copies of the articles with which they are involved as part of their editorial processes. In searching for an author's-version, it can be worthwhile for an author to contact their editor to see if a copy has been retained.

Where no copy has been retained, it will be necessary under the EC Open Access Pilot requirements for the author to ask permission to use the publisher’s pdf.  The template permission letter provided by OpenAIRE includes a paragraph asking for this permission.

Obviously, it is easiest if authors retain an e-copy of their final text - and save it somewhere obvious and safe. They could even use their institutional repository for this, under the provision of an embargo on publication until the publisher’s permission has been obtained. Keeping one’s own copy is a simple step while the article is being produced and helps to encourage a greater realisation of the publishing process and the change of rights that often occurs as part of it.

Annex 1 - Special clauses (see clause 39)

Leaflet Open access pilot in FP7

Powerpoint presentation on open access pilot

Guide to Intellectual Property Rules for FP7 projects pg. 15 – 18, section 7.3

Guidance notes on Project Reporting, see especially pg 5, 25, 32

Model cover letter for amendment to publishing agreement:

BG CS DA DE EL EN ES ET FI FR HU IT LT LV MT NL PL PT RO SK SL SV

Model amendment to publishing agreement:

BG CS DA DE EL EN ES ET FI FR HU IT LT LV MT NL PL PT RO SK SL SV

General

When an article is accepted for publication in a journal, the publisher needs permission from the author to do so.

In most cases, authors grant permission by signing over copyright to the publisher. This gives the publisher the full rights in and control over the article. Consequently, if an author wishes to reuse the article at a later stage, e.g. to make the work available in Open Access, he/she will have to ask permission from the publisher to do so.

Alternatively, authors can grant the publisher a Licence to Publish. With this agreement, authors can retain copyright and the right to deposit the article in an Open Access repository, while providing the publisher with the necessary rights to publish the article.

In the context of the FP7 and ERC Open Access requirements, it is important to be aware of this distinction in dealing with intellectual property rights; it has significant impact on how easy it is for authors to fulfill the requirements.

What to do

 There are three different scenarios:

1. Your article has been accepted for publication by the journal, and the publisher asks you to sign a publishing or copyright transfer agreement (CTA). Some publishers offer a Licence to Publish. At this stage, you have a number of options to ensure that you can fulfill the EC requirements: to make your article or final, peer-reviewed manuscript available in open access within the specified timeframe (6-12 months depending on research area).
   
   

   Does the agreement ask you to sign over your copyright?

   yes	do not sign, but provide licence to publish
   	or
   	sign and provide an addendum ensuring you can fulfill the EC requirements
   no	check if the agreement, licence and/or the publisher's policy leaves you the rights to fulfill the EC requirements



2. You have already signed a publishing agreement/CTA signing over your copyright to the publisher for the publication of your article.
   
   

   Does the agreement leave you the rights to fulfill the EC requirements?

   yes	provide open access to your article or final, peer-reviewed manuscript through OpenAIRE
   no	ask cooperation of the publisher by signing an addendum to enable you to fulfill your obligation under the EC requirements
   I'm not sure	check the publisher's policy on open access and 'self-archiving' of your article/final peer-reviewed manuscript



3. You have published your article in an Open Access Journal. The EC requirements ask you to deposit your article in an institutional or subject-based repository. Some OA publishers already deposit the articles they publish in OA repositories as well, because it improves visibility.
   
   

   Does your publisher deposit your article in an OA repository?

   yes	you need not take further action
   no	deposit your article in your institutional or subject based OA repository. You may wish to check your publishing agreement or licence for your rights to fulfill the EC requirements, as described in scenario 2.

Publishers

Many publishers already have a policy that allows for a form of 'self-archiving' of articles or final peer-reviewed manuscripts. If you want to find out what your publisher's policy is, you can check the Sherpa/RoMEO database which provides details and explanations.

Still, your publisher may refuse to cooperate. What can you do?

1. As long as you have not signed over your copyright to the publisher yet, it is important to realize that

   - as the author you are under the obligation of your EC grant to fulfill the open access requirements
   and
   - as the author, you are the legal copyright holder and can decide what to do with your copyright.

   This gives you the opportunity to
   - request the publisher to reconsider his refusal given the EC Open Access policy
   or
   - submit your article to another (Open Access) journal, that enables you to fulfill your requirements.

2. If the publisher persists in his refusal to sign the Licence to Publish or Addendum to the Agreement/CTA, or refuses to give you permission after you have signed the Agreement/CTA, and you wish your article to be published in his journal, it is important that

   - you ask the publisher to confirm his refusal of permission in writing
   and
   - inform your EC project officer by providing the publisher's written refusal of permission.

The terms pre-print and post-print are often used to describe successive stages in the development of an article. However, the terms are used to mean different things by different people and this can cause some confusion and ambiguity.

One usage of the term pre-print is to describe the first draft of the article - before peer-review, even before any contact with a publisher. This use is common amongst academics, for whom the key modification of an article is the peer-review process.

Another use of the term pre-print is for the finished article, reviewed and amended, ready and accepted for publication - but separate from the version that is type-set or formatted by the publisher. This use is more common amongst publishers, for whom the final stage of modification to an article is the arrangement of the material for putting online or for print publication.

Within the Open Access community, the general use of the terms characterises pre-prints as the version of the paper before peer review and post-prints as the version of the paper after peer-review, with revisions having been made. This means that in terms of content, post-prints are the articles as published. However, in terms of appearance this might not be the same as the published article, as publishers often reserve for themselves rights in their own arrangement of type-setting and formatting.

Some publishers insist that authors use the publisher-generated pdf - often because the publishers want their material to be seen as a professionally produced pdf that fits with their own house-style. However, copyright law in different countries varies as to the status of such a file. Under UK copyright law for example, such a formatted file is the copyright of the publisher and cannot be used without explicit permission. In other countries, for example the Netherlands, the situation is different. It is important to be aware of the copyright and IPR framework in one’s own country and act accordingly. The OpenAIRE National Open Access Desks will be able to direct authors to the correct information in their case.

The SHERPA/RoMEO database classifies publishers into four different colours, according to the restrictions imposed by their copyright transfer agreements. These terms have become widely used in the Open Access community.

• GREEN publishers allow archiving of pre-print and post-print
• BLUE publishers allow archiving of post-print (i.e., final draft post-refereeing)
• YELLOW publishers allow archiving of pre-print (i.e., pre-refereeing)
• WHITE publishers do not allow archiving of any material

Where explicit permission to mount a full-text version in a repository is not given, or even denied, the EC and ERC Open Access mandates require the author to contact the publisher. The author should inform the publisher of the EC or ERC Open Access requirements for his/her article, and ask for an exception to the publisher’s normal policy to enable compliance with the mandate. It is important to obtain this permission in writing.

When writing to publishers, it is better to write to the editor or officer in charge of authors' rights if possible, rather than to a general publisher's email for permissions for re-use of published material. It is important that the request be seen as coming from the author and is part of the publisher/author relationship.

The EC provides a set of resources, among which a model for a publishing agreement addendum and covering letter to the publisher; these can be found here.

The majority of publishers support the right of academic authors to mount their own work online. Publisher policies on copyright are therefore in general not an obstacle to complying with the EC Open Access Pilot requirements. In some cases, explicit permission is not given or even excluded in the standard copyright agreement. In those cases, the Open Access Pilot guidelines require to author to contact the publisher and negotiate an arrangement.

To find out what permissions are normally given as part of each publisher's copyright transfer agreement, authors can consult the globally used RoMEO database, maintained by SHERPA. This database details the rights given to authors by the major publishers of academic journals.

No longer available, referred to EC resources.

How to use the Ask OpenAIRE Service

Step 1 – How to submit a new Question

• You can submit a new Question to the system by filling in the required fields and choosing the subject of your query and your country
• Please enter your question in the box ‘Description’; if necessary you can enter additional notes and/or attach a file
• You will receive an email confirming the successful submission of your Question
• An email is also sent to the Helpdesk staff, notifying them of the submission of a new Question to the system
• Each new question receives a unique question number; you can use this number to view the status of the Question in the system

Step 2 – Acceptance of a new Question

• When a country is chosen, the national coordinator from that country will respond; otherwise, the Helpdesk coordinator will change the assignment of your Question according to location or subject
• The status of your Question is then changed from ‘NEW’ to ‘IN PROGRESS’
• You will receive an email confirming any updates made to your Question

Step 3 – Processing the Question

• While your Question is in progress, you can view the status in the system using your unique question number
• You will receive an email confirming any updates made to your Question
• If needed you can add notes or feedback to your Question
• You will receive an answer to your Question within two working days of entering it into the system

Step 4 – Closing the Question and providing an answer to your Question

• When the answer to your Question is ready, you will receive it via email
• The status of your Question is then changed from ‘IN PROGRESS’ to ‘CLOSED’
• If the helpdesk staff considers your Question to be of a generic nature and also of interest to others, it will be saved and stored in the Helpdesk’s knowledge base for future reference