The future of Transfer

1. The future of Transfer Alison Mitchell, co-Chair, Transfer

2. Unpleasant surprises… “Where’s the journal I paid for?”

3. Common complaints… • 91.4% of librarians surveyed* feel that the transfer of journals between publishers causes them “very” or “fairly” significant problems • Almost 50% of respondents spend a lot of time amending serials management systems and internal records as the result of a transfer • The area where the highest percentage of respondents said they have often experienced problems was “subscription information” (delays in data being transferred to the new publishers, intermediaries not being informed) • When asked to list the two most significant transfer issues that cause them problems, librarians mainly cited access to current content and the time required to amend their systems. • Access to archives/backfiles, big deals, and pricing were also cited *ICOLC/Transfer survey, May 2011 164 respondents 65% North America, 14% Europe, 14.5% Asia-Pacific

4. Problems for publishers too • Publishers were surveyed* in their roles as both ‘Transferring’ and ‘Receiving’ Publishers • The area where the highest percentage of Transferring Publishers had often experienced problems was in the transfer of subscriber information. Over 70% of respondents sometimes or often had problems in this area • Many Transferring Publishers did not know whether there had been communication with a large number of third-party organisations, including A&I services and link resolver companies • The areas where the highest percentage of Receiving Publishers had often experienced problems were the receipt of subscriber information and content files • 55% of Receiving publishers grace online access to existing subscribers for one month or more • 60% of respondents did not have a central coordinator responsible for overseeing the transfer of journal publishing arrangements *Transfer survey, June 2011 151 respondents 34 commercial publishers; 8 NFPs; 16 societies; 7 university presses

5. We prescribe… • A voluntary Code containing best practice guidelines for both Transferring and Receiving Publishers • Established in 2006, Version 2.0 launched in September 2008 • Endorsed by 36 publishers, including Elsevier, Wiley, Springer, T&F, OUP, T&F, Wolters Kluwer, Sage • Transfer alerting service – 378 registrants (mainly librarians), 215 transfers announced to date • www.uksg.org/transfer

6. Key areas treated For the Transferring Publisher and the Receiving Publisher: • Access to the title: Includes ensuring continued access to customers where the Transferring Publisher has granted perpetual access rights • Digital content files — current (born digital) and archive (digitized from print), if available: Covers transfer of digital files • Subscription lists: Covers early transfer of the subscription lists and an outline of subscriber data types • Journal URL: Covers transfer of journal-related domain name(s) and provision of a link or redirect to the new journal home page Communication: Covers communication to customers (including electronic table of contents alert recipients) and relevant intermediaries • DOI name ownership: Covers changes to Digital Object Identifier (DOI) name ownership

7. Does it work? • By registering as Transfer compliant, publishers agree to abide – where commercially possible – by the terms of the Transfer Code • Librarians and societies are increasingly asking for Transfer compliance in their licensing and contractual arrangements with publishers • Various other reports and initiatives are citing Transfer’s work and recommending compliance (JISC Collections, RIN) But… • It’s hard to give the Code more ‘teeth’, as we must be careful to avoid anticompetitive practices • A recent informal list serv poll identified ongoing issues, some involving Transfer-compliant publishers

8. So, what’s next? • Transfer Working Group – 8 publishers, 5 librarians and 6 others – meets every 2 months • New co-Chairs for 2011, Elizabeth Winter (Georgia Institute of Technology) and Alison Mitchell (Nature Publishing Group) • 2011 priorities: • Revision: Revise and update the Code • Education: Educate the main constituencies (librarians, publishers and societies) about the problems and priorities of the others • Database: Update the Transfer Alerting service and use the data to populate a searchable database of transfer information

9. Revision of the Code Some of the areas that are under consideration (not explicitly covered in Version 2.0, or in need of updating): • Recommend use of the Transfer alerting service and new database? • Suggest changes that publishers can make in the event of a transfer to ensure that the articles are still discoverable by search engines? • Consider including guidelines about redirecting apps and social media sites (eg Facebook, podcast archive)? • Transfer of email alerts – there may be data protection issues, but at a minimum the Transferring Publisher might contact the registrants and give a link for future sign-up at the Receiving Publisher’s site? • Transferring Publisher to identify and pass on information about existing discovery services and link resolvers? • Preservation-related registries - Transferring Publisher to make it clear whether content will stay as part of an existing arrangement?

10. Education – who needs to know what? • Publishers • Need to understand the effects of transfers on librarians, and the steps that they can take to mitigate or remove these effects • Central coordination of transfer activities helps with communication • Better understanding of what links resolvers are and how they are used • Encouragement to endorse Transfer actively • Societies: • Need to understand the above, and also to ensure that the terms of their contracts with the Transferring and Receiving Publishers are consistent and workable • Librarians: • Briefing on the complexities of data transfer • Briefing on the transfer process – why do transfers happen mid year? Why is there often so little time? Where can they look for information?

11. Database and enhanced alerting • JISC funding has been approved for the ETAS (Enhanced Transfer Alerting Service) • MIMAS will host and run the service as part of JUSP (Journal Usage Statistics Portal) • Initial design work is under way, and the project is expected to be completed by the end of October 2011 • Transfer-compliant publishers complete a simple form, which is circulated by e-mail and the details are automatically entered in to the database • In the mean time, librarians or publishers can sign up for the Transfer alerting service at: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/TRANSFER

12. Our publishers

13. Please join us!Please help us!www.uksg.org/transfera.mitchell@nature.com