Legislating Open Access: Making the Case for a Secondary Publishing Right in Canada
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17161/jcel.v8i1.23101Abstract
This paper examines the potential of Secondary Publishing Rights (SPR) as a legal solution to safeguard Green Open Access (OA) and promote free and global access to Canadian research. SPR grants journal article authors the right to deposit a version of a finished article in an institutional or disciplinary repository, regardless of publisher agreements. If implemented in Canada, SPR will empower researchers, allowing them to make their work OA while also providing them with an easy path to ensuring compliance with OA funder mandates. In this paper, we compare SPR to alternatives like Rights Retention Strategies (RRS) and collective licensing, highlighting the variations of SPR implemented in Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Bulgaria. Adopting SPR in Canada will significantly improve public access to research, strengthen Canada's global research impact, and create a more equitable scholarly publishing landscape.
References
Закон за изменение и допълнение на Закона за авторското право и сродните му права [Law for Amendment and Supplement of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights], ДВ, бр. 98 (2023), https://dv.parliament.bg/DVWeb/showMaterialDV.jsp?idMat=201485 (Bulg.).
ACS Publications. (n.d.). Open Access pricing for authors: The power of choice. Retrieved November 8, 2024, from https://acsopenscience.org/researchers/oa-pricing/
Angelopoulos, C. (2022). Study on EU copyright and related rights and access to and reuse of scientific publications, including Open Access: Exceptions and limitations, rights retention strategies and the Secondary Publication Right. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/891665
Art. 30 Loi n° 2016-1321 du 7 octobre 2016 pour une République numérique [Art. 30 Law No. 2016-1321 for a Digital Republic], J.O. 8 oct. 2016 https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/jorf/article_jo/JORFARTI000033202841 (Fr.).
Band, J., & Butler, B. (2013). Some cautionary tales about collective licensing. Michigan State International Law Review, 21(3), 687–728. https://doi.org/10.17613/zzc5-9m95
Borrego, Á. (2023). Article processing charges for open access journal publishing: A review. Learned Publishing, 36(3), 359–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1558
Brembs, B., Huneman, P., Schönbrodt, F., Nilsonne, G., Susi, T., Siems, R., Perakakis, P., Trachana, V., Ma, L., & Rodriguez-Cuadrado, S. (2023). Replacing academic journals. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7974116
Budzinski, O., Grebel, T., Wolling, J., & Zhang, X. (2020). Drivers of article processing charges in open access. Scientometrics, 124, 2185–2206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03578-3
Butler, L.-A., Matthias, L., Simard, M.-A., Mongeon, P., & Haustein, S. (2023). The oligopoly’s shift to open access: How the big five academic publishers profit from article processing charges. Quantitative Science Studies, 4(4), 778–799. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00272
Caso, R., & Dore, G. (2021). Academic copyright, Open Access and the “moral” Second Publication Right. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3981756
Chan, L. (2019, April 30). Platform capitalism and the governance of knowledge infrastructure. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2656601
Cherubini, M., Conti, S., De Angelis, D., Faro, S., Giannini, S., Lombardi, S., Mangiaracina, S., Marzocchi, S., Mazza, D., Molino, A., Peruginelli, G., Sinigaglia, L., & Ciurlia, F. (2024). I diritti d’autore nella pubblicazione scientifica. Informazioni utili e approfondimenti. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.32091/GuidaRight2Pub
cOAlition S. (n.d.-a). cOAlition S confirms the end of its financial support for Open Access publishing under transformative arrangements after 2024. Retrieved November 8, 2024, from https://www.coalition-s.org/coalition-s-confirms-the-end-of-its-financial-support-for-open-access-publishing-under-transformative-arrangements-after-2024/
cOAlition S. (n.d.-b). Plan S rights retention strategy. Retrieved November 8, 2024, from https://www.coalition-s.org/rights-retention-strategy/
cOAlition S. (n.d.-c). Why hybrid journals do not lead to full and immediate Open Access. Retrieved November 8, 2024, from https://www.coalition-s.org/why-hybrid-journals-do-not-lead-to-full-and-immediate-open-access/
cOAlition S. (n.d.-d). Plan S Principles and Implementation Guide. (n.d.). Retrieved August 25, 2025, from https://www.coalition-s.org/wp-content/uploads/PlanS_Principles_and_Implementation_310519.pdfcOAlitionS. (2021, April 20). The Rights Retention Strategy and publisher equivocation: An open letter to researchers. https://www.coalition-s.org/the-rrs-and-publisher-equivocation-an-open-letter-to-researchers/
Code de droit économique [Economic Law Code] art. XI.197, Feb. 28, 2013, 2013A11134. https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/eli/loi/2013/02/28/2013A11134/justel#Art.XI.197 (Belg).
de Castro, P., Herb, U., Rothfritz, L., Schmal, W. B., & Schöpfel, J. (2024). Galvanising the Open Access community: A study on the impact of Plan S. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13738479
de Vries, M. L. (2018). Harnessing the power of green open access: Implementing the “Taverne” law in the Dutch academy. Septentrio Conference Series, 1. https://doi.org/10.7557/5.4527
Eglen, S. J. (2023, March 18). UK institutional rights retention policies. https://sje30.github.io/rrs/rrs.html
European Commission: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2024). Improving access to and reuse of research results, publications and data for scientific purposes: Study to evaluate the effects of the EU copyright framework on research and the effects of potential interventions and to identify and present relevant provisions for research in EU data and digital legislation, with a focus on rights and obligations. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/633395
European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities (ALLEA), & Hugenholtz, P. B. (2024). ALLEA statement in support of secondary publication rights for scholarly articles. ALLEA. https://zenodo.org/records/13959675
Fonds de recherche du Québec. (2021, June 1). The Fonds de Recherche du Québec support open science by joining cOAlition S. https://frq.gouv.qc.ca/en/les-fonds-de-recherche-du-quebec-appuient-la-science-ouverte-en-joignant-la-coalition-s/
Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana [Official Gazette of the Italian Republic], 9 ago. 2013, n. 186 https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/gu/2013/08/09/186/sg/pdf (Italy).
Gesetz über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte (Urheberrechtsgesetz - UrhG) [Act on Copyright and Related Rights (Copyright Act)] § 60d https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_urhg/englisch_urhg.html#p0273 (Ger.).
Government of Canada: Science and Innovation. (2016, December 20). Tri-Agency open access policy on publications(2015). https://science.gc.ca/site/science/en/interagency-research-funding/policies-and-guidelines/open-access/tri-agency-open-access-policy-publications-2015
Government of Canada: Science and Innovation. (2024, August 7). The presidents of Canada’s federal research granting agencies announce a review of the Tri-Agency Open Access policy on publications. https://science.gc.ca/site/science/en/interagency-research-funding/policies-and-guidelines/open-access
Hinchliffe, L. J. (2024, November 12). Green open access—Free for authors but at a cost for readers. The Scholarly Kitchen. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2024/11/12/green-open-access-free-for-authors-but-at-a-cost-for-readers/
Huang, C.-K., Neylon, C., Hosking, R., Montgomery, L., Wilson, K. S., Ozaygen, A., & Brookes-Kenworthy, C. (2020). Evaluating the impact of open access policies on research institutions. eLife, 9, Article e57067. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.57067
Khoo, S. Y.-S. (2021). The Plan S Rights Retention Strategy is an administrative and legal burden, not a sustainable open access solution. Insights, 34, Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.556
Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2018). Do authors comply when funders enforce open access to research? Nature, 562, 483–486. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-07101-w
Lazarova, A. (2024). Conceptualising the right to secondary publication. In C. Sganga & T. E. Synodinou (Eds.), Flexibilities in copyright law (forthcoming). Routledge. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=4934531
Ley 17/2022, de 5 de septiembre, por la que se modifica la Ley 14/2011, de 1 de junio, de la Ciencia, la Tecnología y la Innovación [Law 17/2022 Modifying the Science, Technology and Innovation Law], B.O.E., 6 sept. 2022, núm. 214 https://www.boe.es/eli/es/l/2022/09/05/17/con (Spain).
Majekolagbe, F. O. (2024). A right to republish: Redesigning copyright law for research works. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 25(2). https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mjlst/vol25/iss2/2
Moore, S. (2022, October 4). Rights retention: Publisher responses to the University’s pilot. Unlocking Research [blog]. University of Cambridge. https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=3361
Moore, S. A. (2023). The politics of rights retention. Publications, 11(2), Article 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11020028
Ngan, J. (2023, October 17). The rising financial precarity of universities. University Affairs. https://universityaffairs.ca/news/news-article/the-rising-financial-precarity-of-universities/
Paquet, V., van Bellen, S., & Larivière, V. (2022). Measuring the prevalence of open access in Canada: A national comparison. The Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 45(1). https://doi.org/10.5206/cjilsrcsib.v45i1.14149
Rumsey, S. (2022, October 26). Reviewing the rights retention strategy – a pathway to wider open access? LSE Impact Blog. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2022/10/26/reviewing-the-rights-retention-strategy-a-pathway-to-wider-open-access/
Schearer, K. (2024, November 14). In defence of repositories. Confederation of Open Access Repositories [COAR]. https://coar-repositories.org/news-updates/in-defense-of-repositories/
Shavell, S. (2009). Should copyright of academic works be abolished? (Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 10-10). https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1525667
Sivertsen, G., & Zhang, L. (2022, August 11). Article Processing Charges (APCs) and the new enclosure of research. LSE Impact Blog. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2022/08/11/article-processing-charges-apcs-and-the-new-enclosure-of-research/
Sondervan, J., Schalken, A., de Boer, J., & Woutersen-Windhouwer, S. (2021). Sharing published short academic works in institutional repositories after six months: The implementation of the article 25fa (Taverne amendment) in the Dutch Copyright Act. LIBER Quarterly, 31(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.53377/lq.10915
SPARC. (n.d.-a). Campus Open Access Funds. Retrieved March 13, 2025, from https://sparcopen.org/our-work/oa-funds/
SPARC. (n.d.-b) 2022 OSTP public access memo guidance. https://sparcopen.org/our-work/2022-updated-ostp-policy-guidance/
Stockholm University Communications Office. (2023, October 20). Open access: Need to move away from transformative agreements. https://www.su.se/english/news/open-access-need-to-move-away-from-transformative-agreements-1.683787
Suber, P. (2024, October 22). Methods of rights retention. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ucmrAnkOSnZdnYBuZAiK2acih0dYyWz4HAt9MYuxnJ4/
Ten Holter, C. (2020). The repository, the researcher, and the REF: “It’s just compliance, compliance, compliance.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(1), Article 102079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.102079
Tsakonas, G., Zoutsou, K., & Perivolari, M. (2023). Secondary Publishing Rights in Europe: Status, challenges & opportunities. Knowledge Rights 21. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10798286
University of Oxford. (n.d.-a). Rights retention. https://openaccess.ox.ac.uk/rights-retention
University of Oxford. (n.d.-b). Statute XVI: Property, contracts, and trusts. https://governance.admin.ox.ac.uk/legislation/statute-xvi-property-contracts-and-trusts
Urheberrechts-Novelle 2015 – Urh-Nov 2015 [Copyright Amendment 2015] Bundesgesetzblatt [BGBl]. I Nr. 99/2015, https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/BgblAuth/BGBLA_2015_I_99/BGBLA_2015_I_99.pdfsig (Austria).
Wijziging van de Auteurswet en de Wet op de naburige rechten in verband met de versterking van de positie van de auteur en de uitvoerende kunstenaar bij overeenkomsten betreffende het auteursrecht en het naburig recht (Wet auteurscontractenrecht); Nota naar aanleiding van het Verslag [Amendment of the Copyright Act and the Neighbouring Rights Act in connection with the strengthening of the position of the author and the performing artist in agreements concerning copyright and neighbouring rights (Copyright Contracts Act)], Eerste Kamer der Staten-Generaal, June 29, 2015, Kamerstuk 33308 nr. E (Kingdom of the Netherlands). https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-33308-E.html
Willinsky, J. (2022). Copyright’s broken promise: How to restore the law’s ability to promote the progress of science. The MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262544412/copyrights-broken-promise/
Willinsky, J. (2023, January 12). Learning to campaign for copyright reform. Slaw. https://www.slaw.ca/2023/01/12/learning-to-campaign-for-copyright-reform/
White House Office of Science and Technology Policy [OSTP]. (2022). Ensuring free, immediate, and equitable access to federally funded research. Executive Office of the President of the United States. https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/08-2022-OSTP-Public-Access-Memo.pdf
Zhang, L., Wei, Y., Huang, Y., & Sivertsen, G. (2022). Should open access lead to closed research? The trends towards paying to perform research. Scientometrics, 127(12), 7653–7679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04407-5
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Brianne Selman, Lucie Guibault, Mark Swartz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
