2

I have a prepint paper uploaded with open access on arxiv.org. My university also has an open access repository and we are encouraged to upload our prepints also there. Now my question is whether it is allowed to upload the paper from arxiv.org (with the arxiv title page) also to another repository? Do you have any idea? I'd appreciate every comment.

PeterBe
  • 365
  • 2
  • 11
  • Of course it is allowed. – darij grinberg Sep 15 '21 at 14:05
  • 1
    By "open access", do you mean the preprint was submitted under one of the Creative Commons licenses? – Anyon Sep 15 '21 at 14:18
  • Yes it is open access with a CC license – PeterBe Sep 15 '21 at 14:18
  • Then you (and everyone else) should have a clear right to distribute the PDF, including at other repositories. – Anyon Sep 15 '21 at 14:20
  • 3
    arXiv expects you to upload the latex source files when available, and pdf only if not. So if you have the source files, you could just compile it yourself, and if not, you have the pdf in its state before the upload anyway. So why do you need to upload the version with the arXiv title page? – GoodDeeds Sep 15 '21 at 20:01
  • @GoodDeeds What's wrong with that? It sends the message "there is a much better preprint server for our discipline, use that". – Federico Poloni Sep 16 '21 at 07:22
  • @FedericoPoloni I am sorry I don't understand what you mean, to whom are you referring with regards to sending a message to? It seems the OP themselves wants to upload the preprint in the university server in addition to arXiv, they are not being compelled to do it. – GoodDeeds Sep 16 '21 at 07:29
  • @GoodDeeds It sends a message to people who find OP's papers on the university's repository: "here is my paper; you can find it here as well for your convenience and because I do not wan to lose readers, but in future I recommend to use a more standard preprint server where you can find more stuff at the same time, in a better format and with better interaction with other services". – Federico Poloni Sep 16 '21 at 07:40
  • @FedericoPoloni Ok, I had not thought of it that way, that's a great point. – GoodDeeds Sep 16 '21 at 07:49
  • Thanks for all the messages. Do normally arXiv publications have a DOI? I somehow can't find a DOI on our paper. A DOI would be the best because then I could just use the DOI in my university's repository and not upload the file itself (uploading the file is not as straight forward as one can think because I have to deal with licensing issues as buffy indicated in his/her answer below) – PeterBe Sep 16 '21 at 08:22
  • @Anyon I don't think 'everyone else... should have a clear right to distribute the PDF' is true of all the variants of the CC licence: some have "ND" in their acronym, which IIRC stands for "no distribution". – Daniel Hatton Sep 16 '21 at 16:11
  • 4
    @DanielHatton "ND" stands for no derivatives. I'd be surprised if there was a CC license not letting users copy the work (would seem to go against their whole ethos), but in any case I only intended the statement to apply to licenses supported by ArXiv: https://arxiv.org/help/license – Anyon Sep 16 '21 at 16:54
  • @Anyon You're right. I managed to reconstruct how I came to hold the incorrect opinion I expressed above, but I don't think the process is of general interest. – Daniel Hatton Sep 16 '21 at 19:03
  • @FedericoPoloni That's exactly the message you should send. Mirroring functionalities like arxiv etc. (publication databases, etc.) locally creates more work for everyone, and there's no real point to it (except for creating unneeded admin work for scientists). – user151413 Sep 16 '21 at 19:50
  • @user151413 I agree with you that Arxiv is a much better preprint server option. Maybe you read my comment in a different way, now I realize it might sound ambiguous. – Federico Poloni Sep 16 '21 at 20:08
  • @FedericoPoloni As I said, I think this is a message one should send. There's nothing wrong with it (as your comment might suggest), on the contrary. – user151413 Sep 16 '21 at 20:10

2 Answers2

6

You still hold copyright to things uploaded to arXiv. You have granted them a non-exclusive license only. You retain all other rights. So, yes, the paper is yours to use as you wish.

However, you can't terminate the license you have already given since it is perpetual, so you can't now give an "exclusive" license to someone else. If you transfer copyright to another (such as publishing in a journal) you need to inform them of any license(s) you have already granted, since the new holder will also be bound by them.

But, the simple answer is yes. You can do that.

You need to ask arXiv about the title page since they created that. It might be easier to omit that and provide a different one if needed. (Thanks to user Arno for reminding me of this.)

Buffy
  • 363,966
  • 84
  • 956
  • 1,406
  • This doesn't address whether you can reupload the pdf obtained from the arXiv, which includes arXiv-formatting. – Arno Sep 15 '21 at 14:11
  • @Arno, is the formatting considered a creative contribution? I doubt that is the case. But you are correct that I was referring to the content, not the specific formatted version. – Buffy Sep 15 '21 at 14:14
  • Thanks Buffy for your answer. To be totally honest, I do not understand your explanations about abrogating the license. In fact the prepint is currently also under review at a journal and (hopefully) it will be published there. If I understood you correctly in that case I am not allowed to upload the arxiv article in the other repository unless I inform the other repository about a new license whenever the article is published at a journal? – PeterBe Sep 15 '21 at 14:17
  • @Buffy I don't know whether the arXiv would have a case for objecting. I'm pretty sure the arXiv doesn't object. But the OP explicitly mentions uploading the copy from the arXiv, rather than an independently compiled version of the same content. Your edit addresses this. – Arno Sep 15 '21 at 14:18
  • 1
    Once you give a license it is permanent. You can't un-give it. You can give other licenses as you choose, but not "exclusive" licenses, since there is already one out there. It is only when you give copyright to a journal that you need to inform them of existing licenses. You don't need to inform everyone when you give a new license. Does that help? – Buffy Sep 15 '21 at 14:20
  • Thanks Buffy for your answer. Honestly I am still kind of confused. But as it is not so important to upload it also at another repository I think I will just not do this because I don't want to deal with licensing issues and the paper is already uploaded in arxiv. I thought maybe it is just not a problem at all to upload an open access article in another open access repository without having to deal with license issue (the article has a creative commons license). Thanks a lot for making me aware of possible license violations. – PeterBe Sep 15 '21 at 14:26
  • If it has a CC license then that license is already "sticky" and will apply to the newly uploaded copy/version. I think you don't need to think further and can just do it, so long as the new archive doesn't require a more restrictive license than the CC one you gave it. Some publishers don't like CC licenses, however, so make sure your editor is informed. In general, once you give a permissive license, you can't replace it with a restrictive one. Readers can still rely on the permissive version (i.e. "sticky"). – Buffy Sep 15 '21 at 14:32
  • Thanks for your answer Buffy. As I am not aware of the used and required licenses in detail I will not upload the arxiv article to another repository as this might lead to violations of the license agreement especially I can't ensure that I am not abrogating the license which is not allowed as you stated. Thanks for the information. – PeterBe Sep 16 '21 at 16:38
  • No, you are misunderstanding. You are free to upload as long as you still hold the copyright and the new site doesn't require you give them an exclusive license. Ask your university about it, but I suspect that they need a license similar to arXiv: non-exclusive, perpetual, license to distribute. But with a CC license already applied, they can probably already do that. I meant "abrogate" in the sense of "take back" or "terminate" the license. – Buffy Sep 16 '21 at 18:16
1

Of course, there is absolutely no harm in that. The idea is to get the attention of other researchers. And using multiple platforms will help materialise that better.

In the traditional system, a submitted manuscript receives feedback from 2 or 3 peer reviewers before publication. With a preprint, other researchers can discover your work sooner, potentially pointing out critical flaws or errors, suggest new studies or data that strengthen your argument or even recommend a collaboration that could lead to publication in a more prestigious journal.

Read this.

F. A. Mala
  • 705
  • 3
  • 16
  • Thanks Firdous for your answer. Do normally arXiv publications have a DOI? I somehow can't find a DOI on our paper. A DOI would be the best because then I could just use the DOI in my university's repository and not upload the file itself (uploading the file is not as straight forward as one can think because I have to deal with licensing issues as buffy indicated in his/her answer) – PeterBe Sep 16 '21 at 16:33
  • $PeterBe, kindly go through this: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62480/why-does-arxiv-org-not-assign-dois – F. A. Mala Sep 16 '21 at 17:04