Copyright compliance and infringement in ResearchGate full-text journal articles
- 3.4k Downloads
ResearchGate is increasingly used by scholars to upload the full-text of their articles and make them freely available for everyone. This study aims to investigate the extent to which ResearchGate members as authors of journal articles comply with publishers’ copyright policies when they self-archive full-text of their articles on ResearchGate. A random sample of 500 English journal articles available as full-text on ResearchGate were investigated. 108 articles (21.6%) were open access (OA) published in OA journals or hybrid journals. Of the remaining 392 articles, 61 (15.6%) were preprint, 24 (6.1%) were post-print and 307 (78.3%) were published (publisher) PDF. The key finding was that 201 (51.3%) out of 392 non-OA articles infringed the copyright and were non-compliant with publishers’ policy. While 88.3% of journals allowed some form of self-archiving (SHERPA/RoMEO green, blue or yellow journals), the majority of non-compliant cases (97.5%) occurred when authors self-archived publishers’ PDF files (final published version). This indicates that authors infringe copyright most of the time not because they are not allowed to self-archive, but because they use the wrong version, which might imply their lack of understanding of copyright policies and/or complexity and diversity of policies.
KeywordsResearchGate Copyright compliance Copyright infringement Depositing Researchers Journal articles Open access Self-archiving
The author would like to thank Mr. M. Sangari for his help in part of the data collection.
The study was partially funded by Kharazmi University (Iran).
- Chakraborty, N. (2012). Activities and reasons for using social networking sites by research scholars in NEHU: A study on Facebook and ResearchGate. Planner, 19–27.Google Scholar
- Howard, J. (2013). Posting your latest article? You might have to take it down, chronicles of higher education. http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/posting-your-latest-article-you-might-have-to-take-it-down/48865. 6 December 2013.
- Inaba, R., & Yamazaki, R. (2015). Survey on copyright infringement of digital contents: A case study of Japanese University Students. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 657–660). Springer, Berlin. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-21383-5_110.
- Isiakpona, C. D. (2012). Undergraduate students’ Perception of copyright infringement: A case study of the University of Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice, Paper 689. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/689.
- Library Connect. (2015). Beyond downloads: How scholars save & share research articles. https://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/sites/default/files/Beyond_Downloads_infographic_2015.png.
- Martín-Martín, A., Orduña-Malea, E., Ayllon, J. M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2016). The counting house: Measuring those who count. Presence of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, Informetrics, Webometrics and Altmetrics in the Google Scholar Citations, ResearcherID, ResearchGate, Mendeley & Twitter. EC3 Working Papers, 21. https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.02412.
- Martín-Martín, A., Orduña-Malea, E., Ayllón, J. M., Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2014). Does Google scholar contain all highly cited documents (1950–2013)? EC3 Working Papers, 19. http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.8464.
- Nicholas, D., Rowlands, I., Watkinson, A., Brown, D., Russell, B., & Jamali, H. R. (2013). Have digital repositories come of age? The views of library directors. Webology, 10(2), Article 111. http://www.webology.org/2013/v10n2/a111.pdf.
- Palmer, C. L., Teffeau, L. C., & Newton, M. P. (2008). Identifying factors of success in CIC institutional repository development—final report. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/8981.
- Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2016). ResearchGate articles: Age, discipline, audience size, and impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. In press, doi: 10.1002/asi.23675.
- Van Noorden, R. (2014). Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network, Nature, 512 (14 August), 126–129. http://www.nature.com/news/online-collaboration-scientists-and-the-social-network-1.15711.