Question: Can we earmark funds for the open publication of a book by a foreign publisher from the ARIS project, which started in 2023? We have been informed that ARIS funding is no longer allowed to fund open access publications. As we understand it, the Library has only cancelled the call for APC reimbursement, which we do not believe means that open access publications cannot be funded from other ARIS funds.

Also in the ARIS notice (https://www.aris-rs.si/sl/obvestila/24/odprti-dostop-inf-sprem-zzrid.asp) states that funding for open publications is now to be drawn from the funds allocated to research organisations (ROs) in the context of stable funding for scientific research activities and (co-)funding of research projects.

We would like to know whether funding for open publications is also available from ARIS projects. Can vouchers cover the costs of publishing books or chapters in books?

Answer:

In accordance with the first indent of Article 9(1) Regulation the preparation of a scientific monograph for publication in the open access (BPC) is an eligible cost. The call for tender for the reimbursement of the costs of open access scientific publications (short: call for tender) has been abolished by ARIS, so only the funding instrument is changing (as correctly noted, funding for open access publications is now drawn from the funds allocated to ROs in the context of the stable funding of scientific research activities or (co-)funding of research projects. However, even if the call for tender were still in existence and the eligibility policy were not changed (i.e. only APC costs), then the open access publication of the book would not be eligible for reimbursement. From the third paragraph of Chapter 15 Call for (co-)funding of research projects 2025 It is clear that, in addition to APC, BPC is also an eligible cost, which is a consequence of the requirement of the Regulation.

The change of the ARIS funding instrument is therefore "in your hand", since the costs of producing an open access book would not be reimbursed under the call for tenders, and the regulation in force in 2023 explicitly provides that the costs of scientific publications are also subject to reimbursement of the BPC. To the extent that RO not a recipient of funding under the stable funding of scientific research activities, then funding for open publications is possible under the (co-)funding of research projects. We suggest that you contact ARIS to find out about the process of funding open publications.

Unfortunately, vouchers to cover the costs of publishing books or chapters in books are not available. They are only intended to cover the cost of publishing journal articles, and the link provides information on which publishers you can use vouchers to publish free of charge: https://www.ung.si/sl/knjiznica/objave-v-odprtem-dostopu-ugodnosti/.

Question: The author (researcher) wants to publish in an open access journal Comunicar. The journal is indexed in the DOAJ, which states that there is no APC cost.

However, the journal requires payment of the author in another way. Under Open Access policy The authors who publish in Comunicar only contribute when they have financing for it, acquiring copies for editorial dissemination.

Under Instructions to the author In the case of funded research or work that has institutional support, it is compulsory to collaborate in the promotion of the Journal, by acquiring a minimum number of 15-35 issues for free distribution, depending on numbers of authors, for free distribution, without economic purposes or commercial distribution. "Comunicar" will register these entities in the International registry FundRef (CrossRef) as well as in the journal's official website. In the case of non-funded research, all authors should also collaborate with the acquisition of printed copies and with the online dissemination of their articles.

I wonder if this practice is considered controversial in the scientific community? The extent of the mandatory order and the price are not yet known.

Answer:

Comunicar is an extremely highly ranked journal and is published in all major indexes and, as a true OA journal, in the DOAJ. As a Gold journal, it does not pay APC. We see the payment of printed copies more as a participation in promotion.

Researchers have also published in the latest issue University of Maribor (FOV) and I therefore suggest that you contact them for the latest specific procedures and the amount of any payment.

Question: A researcher (National Institute of Biology) is planning to upload a preprint and a postprint of her article from the journal Water Researh to ArXiv. Please advise if it is necessary to pay a membership fee to the ArXiv? We somehow understand that this is not necessary and that the membership fee only brings some other benefits. Our research organisation has never deposited in ArXiv, at least not in the list of ArXiv participants.

Answer:

Publishing in ArXiv is free of charge for the researcher. Account registration is required. The membership fee is for institutions only and represents a financial support for ArXiv. As the National Institute of Biology is included in the Digital Repository of Research Organisations of Slovenia (DiRROS), we suggest that you also archive a reprint of this article in the DiRROS repository.

Question: A researcher has contacted us with a question about publishing a book chapter with a publisher Book publishing international. He wonders if the publisher is possibly predatory?

The publisher is on Beall's leaves, which is interesting, given that the list is suitable for magazines. The publisher was not on the original list, it was added later (under update).

The publisher has a very unusual business model. The books are not open access, but the publisher still charges authors BPC. The BPC is low, between 100$ and 600$ per book. This price (supposedly) represents a discount of 80% on the base price. Authors are then supposed to receive 80% in revenue from the sale of the book, and the prices are very low. 10$ for the purchase of the pdf. I conclude that sales of these books are not high, otherwise this business model would not be worthwhile for the publisher.

It is unusual for predatory publishers to offer printed books. They are on offer here, but the question is whether they can really be ordered. Also, the publisher has well-organised social networks for a publisher who is supposed to be predatory.

Unfortunately, I can't find anything concrete about the publisher anywhere online. I have only found Link, for which it is entirely possible that the publisher has written positive comments themselves.

So we are asking you if you have any further information about this publisher, and if you have any experience of publishing with this publisher. Unfortunately, there is too little information on the web to be able to advise a researcher with certainty.

Answer:

When we checked the publisher, we came across different opinions, but we should definitely be cautious when making our decision.

The very fact that the publishing house is on Beall's list speaks volumes about the possible questionable practices of this publishing house. What is most disturbing to us is the fact that the publisher is registered in India at the address where Sciencedomain International (SDI) and Knowledge Press and Research Promotion International are also registered. SDI has a proven track record of dubious practices in publishing its journals, and in particular it is known for sending out spam emails inviting journal publications based on unfair practices.

We have also found evidence of Book PI inviting in a similar way. We also found evidence that some authors have received invitations from Book PI to publish their already published works.

It is also strange that it is not possible to subscribe to the full e-book offer as a service. Even if the publishing house did not engage in unfair practices, this would be a bad option for the author, as the visibility of the work would be compromised, which makes no sense at all.

The practice of submitting a work is also strange, as you submit a work using the usual online form without at least having the licence agreement in advance.

We have checked editors who are researchers indexed in Scopus, but who are not necessarily actually acting as editors in Scopus (in other words, they often find their names in one of the databases for this purpose).

You can read a discussion about this publisher at the link, which contains some other facts.

In our opinion, there is a serious possibility that the publishing house is using at least questionable practices in publishing your work, and at the very least, the model is one that does not guarantee effective dissemination of your work, and we would advise against publishing with this publishing house.

Question: We would kindly ask for your opinion on the publisher IntechOpen. The publisher is indexed in both DOAB and Web of Science (book citation index), but it is (was) also listed in the Beall list.

Answer:

We noticed that publishers of some journals that were on the old Beall list (sold to SAGE 2016) have now turned to open access publishing and are indeed quite expensive, but we found no mention of suspicious practices.

We have found some recent discussions where people have recently talked about positive experiences:

• https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is-intechopen-a-predatory-publisher
• https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_InTech_Open_Science_A_predatory_or_a_ligitimate_publisher

The publisher is on the BIBLIO-C list!

They have the OASP logo on their website - IntechOpen is an official member if you look at the website of this association of OD publishers: https://www.oaspa.org/membership/current-members/in-tech-doo/ (Professional Publisher (Medium).

Question:

I want to publish an article in a journal that is not on the list of journals for which vouchers can be used. Can I publish in this journal?

Answer:

Scientific articles can be Decree on the Implementation of Scientific Research Work in Accordance with the Principles of Open Science or with requests from other funders (for example Horizon Europe) You should publish the scientific article in any journal that meets the conditions and criteria for scientific journals (e.g. appropriate peer-review process, continuity of publication, appropriate editorial board, etc.). You should ensure that the openness of the scientific article is adequately ensured, in line with the requirements of the Regulation and of other funders (e.g. the European Commission).

As I understand it, your question relates to the eligibility of costs for open publications of scientific articles.

Article 9 of the Regulation stipulates that the eligible costs of scientific research activities in accordance with the principles of open science in the context of research co-funded by public resources of at least 50 % are also the costs of open access to scientific publications in open access scientific publishing (where entire scientific journals, publishing platforms and monographs are open access). These costs are borne by funders or research organisations (for example through the implementation of stable funding agreements for scientific research, research project co-funding agreements or agreements on other forms of co-funding of scientific research). The costs of publishing open access scientific articles in subscription journals (the so-called hybrid model of scholarly publishing) are not eligible costs, but publications are possible through the use of vouchers agreed by the consortia with the publishing houses, in which case the publication is free of charge for the researchers. The same applies to funding under the Horizon Europe or ERC programmes.

The Regulation also allows for exceptions. Until 30 June 2029 at the latest, the costs of open publications in subscription journals (hybrid model) are eligible in cases where APC vouchers are running out, where there are no contracts with publishers, or where scientific research performers are not included in the contracts with publishers. Exemptions apply only to national funding instruments, not to funding from Horizon Europe and similar programmes (e.g. ERC).

You can find help on how to choose journals to publish in Open Access by following this link: https://odprteobjave.si/en/table/. An MS Excel table is published on this website listing the subscription journals provided by the CTK and NUK consortia, which, in addition to reading, also offer free open access publication in hybrid journals under transformation contracts (hybrid model). All other publications are subject to payment to APC for publication in open access journals based on APC payments. There are also open access journals where the operation of the journal is funded by a selected funder (diamond model). These journals are open for reading, open publication is free of charge. You can also publish your article on publishing platforms (e.g. Open Research Europe, for projects funded by Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe).

To check that the quality and publishing standards of open access journals are being met, we suggest using the portal DOAJ.

Publication in a magazine, as you indicate, is therefore possible. If the publication is in an open access journal (gold or diamond model), the cost of publication is an eligible cost under both national funding instruments and the Horizon Europe or ERC programmes. However, if the publication is in a subscription journal (hybrid model), it is only an eligible cost in national funding instruments (for example, through the implementation of stable funding agreements for scientific research activities, research project co-funding agreements or agreements on other forms of co-funding of scientific research activities), but not in the Horizon Europe or ERC programmes, which do not have exceptions.

Question: How do I publish an article in SCOAP journals³?

Answer:

Publication of articles within the SCOAP partnership³ (partnership of libraries, funders, and research organisations for funding open access article publication in the field of particle physics) is eligible exclusively for content in the field of particle physics. Journals supported for the publication of said content are available at this list. SCOAP³ funds the publication of basic particle physics papers in supported journals under two mechanisms that determine which papers are covered:

• Partially supported journals (funding articles exclusively on basic particle physics - journals also publish other scientific content):
  - Acta Physica Polonica B (Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Physics).
  - Advances in High Energy Physics (Wiley).
  - Chinese Physics C (IOP Publishing).
  - Physical Review C, Physical Review D and Physical Review Letters (American Physical Society).
  - Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics (Oxford University Press).
• Fully supported journals (full funding of articles - journals mostly publish content in the field of particle physics):
  - The European Physical Journal C and The Journal of High Energy Physics (Springer Nature).
  - Nuclear Physics B and Physics Letters B (Elsevier).

The process for submitting an article to a supported journal is the same as for other peer-reviewed scientific journals. When an author intends to submit a scientific article to one of the partly funded journals, must first upload a preprint of the article to arXiv, the standard repository for storing the results of research in particle physics. Before submitting an article to the repository, the author must categorise the content of the article appropriately (using predefined basic particle physics categories for e.g. hep-th, hep-ph, hep-ex, hep-lat, etc.) as this step is crucial to determine the eligibility of the article for funding under SCOAP³. The arXiv moderators have autonomy to review and change the categorisation.

When the content of an article is eligible for publication in a sub-journal, the article automatically goes into SCOAP³ funding at no cost to the author. The article is published in open access and the metadata is freely available. Authors retain copyright and articles are published under an open CC-BY licence. The article is published on the publisher's website as well as stored in the SCOAP³ repository. In this way, the publication meets the open access requirements of the funders.

Question:
My research is in the social sciences or humanities. I would like to publish an open access article in one of the Slovenian scientific journals. I notice that some journals that are supposed to be open access journals state on their websites that the journal is open access under the terms of Creative Commons licences and that the articles are free and open access. Is an article in such a journal open access? Is there a difference between open access and free access?

Answer:
A reasonable or correct description of the journal's publishing policy regarding the explanation of open access publication would be "The Social Science Journal (the name is fictitious) is an open access journal, content is freely, permanently and immediately accessible, articles are published under (e.g.) a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 licence." In open access publishing, the author retains the copyright, but allows the publisher to publish the work for the first time under a Creative Commons or other appropriate licence that specifies further terms of use of the work. Publication in a journal is free of charge (Diamond Journal) or requires payment of APCs (Gold Journal).

Open access means only free reading and access to the content, which may be limited in time, while further use of the work without the consent of the copyright holder (usually the publisher) is not allowed.

We suspect that some journals have misunderstood or even mistranslated the term "Open access", which is not the same as "Free access"."

Question:

As the journal is hybrid, the researcher will not be able to cover the APC cost from project funds (it's an ERC project where the contract explicitly states that costs will only be reimbursed if it's for “full open access venues”). The contribution would therefore be published in closed access and the AAM uploaded to a repository, thus ensuring open access. On the publisher's side and in the Open policy finder, it states that the AAM can be uploaded to a repository without an embargo, but it must have the same license as the published article, which makes no sense in our case, as a closed article does not have a CC license. Do you perhaps have any advice on how to proceed in this case? Is it even possible to upload the AAM to a repository in this case, if the article is not published in open access?

Answer:

Researchers should pay attention to the legal and funder requirements in calls for tenders or co-funding agreements. If the researcher does not publish the article in a journal under a CC BY or CC BY-SA licence, the regulation still requires the researcher to deposit the article under one of these licences in a repository (and thus ensure open access). Given that the publisher does not allow AAM to be published in a repository under these licences, the researcher can inform the publisher at the first contact that the publisher has a legal obligation to ensure open access to publications resulting from publicly-funded research (41. He should further clarify that the Regulation, as an implementing act of the law, obliges him to ensure open access by depositing the AAM or the VoR in a trusted repository under a CC BY or CC BY-SA licence, and that if his article is accepted for publication, he will annotate the peer-reviewed manuscript (AAM) with a CC BY licence and deposit it in the repository upon publication. He should therefore not transfer the material copyright exclusively to the publisher (i.e. he would no longer hold it himself).

Question:

Researchers in Slovenia, in accordance with Decree on the Implementation of Scientific Research Work in Accordance with the Principles of Open Science  (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, Nos 59/23 and 39/25) are obliged to have their articles published under a CC BY or CC BY-SA licence.

How can researchers proceed if a journal has a more restrictive licence or simply a different version of the licence, e.g. CC BY-NC?

Answer:

Researchers must pay attention to legal requirements and funder requirements in public tenders or co-financing agreements. If a publisher does not allow an article to be published under a CC BY or CC BY-SA licence, researchers must, in accordance with the regulation, still deposit the articles under one of the specified licences into a repository. We suggest that researchers inform the publisher right from the first contact that they have a legal obligation to ensure open access to publications resulting from publicly funded research (Article 41 of the ZZrID). They should further explain that the regulation, as an implementing act of the law, requires them to ensure open access by depositing the AAM or VoR into a trusted repository under a CC BY or CC BY-SA licence, and that if their article is accepted for publication, they will equip the peer-reviewed manuscript (AAM) with a CC BY licence and deposit it in the repository upon publication. Therefore, they should never transfer exclusive material copyright to the publisher (meaning they would no longer hold them themselves).

Question: What about the CC licence for articles? I am developing a new website for one of our magazines, which should have articles in open access after one or two years. Initially, only abstracts and extended abstracts would be available.

So what about the licensing in this case, is there any connection? Does delayed access not affect the choice of licence?"

Answer:

The author and the publisher agree everything in the contract they sign for the publication of the article in the journal. The contract must specify, in particular, the type of transfer of rights (exclusive or non-exclusive transfer), the scope and duration of the transfer of rights, the area of validity of the rights, the time limit for publication of the work and the royalty. The publisher, as copyright holder, may then publish the article in "closed access" after the transfer of the relevant material copyright (which must be specified in the contract), subject to the rights being reserved. After a period of time (i.e. one or two years) has elapsed, the copyright manager manages the copyright by publishing the work under a CC licence of his choice, which sets out the further conditions of use of the copyright work. Which licence to choose or determine depends on which licences under copyright and related rights it can grant and the purpose it wishes to achieve.

Question: Dear Sir or Madam, I am contacting you with a question about the use of social media data, in case you might know something about it and can help me. For the purpose of this paper, I was going to research the comments of users' news feeds on Facebook - I am only interested in the lexicon (I would not be operating on any personal data). For this purpose, I wanted to make a small corpus and found that FB does not allow "hunting" of content, so I was going to do it manually (quite time-consuming, but still). I am interested in the following: can I publish the text that I manually copy (and anonymise, of course) in e.g. SketchEngine, Clarine, etc.?

On FB, I saw the following: "You may not access or collect data from or through our Products by automated means (without our prior permission) or attempt to access data that you are not authorised to access, regardless of whether such automated access or collection takes place while you are logged in to your Facebook account. We also reserve all rights in relation to text mining and data mining."

How can I interpret this? Can I use the texts at all?

Answer:

There are a number of considerations to take into account when using content (text, data) posted by people on Facebook. In particular, the Meta Terms of Use, the protection of personal data and, in the case of works of authorship, copyright must be respected. We assume that comments are publicly accessible.

Meta Terms of Use provide that their products may not be used to engage in conduct or share content that infringes or violates the rights of others, including intellectual property rights (e.g. by infringing the copyright or trademarks of others, or by distributing or selling counterfeit or pirated products), unless an exception or restriction under applicable law applies.

A work of authorship is an individual intellectual creation in the field of literature, science and the arts, expressed in any manner. (Article 5) Copyright and Related Rights Act (CRAA)). Facts, ideas, principles, etc. are not protected by copyright. This raises the question of whether news commentaries are copyrightable works at all, for which we have little information. The answer is not clear-cut, every comment would have to be verified, but we assume that at least in most cases they are not works of authorship.

Assuming that comments are not considered to be works of authorship, Meta's terms of access and use must be observed. Meta's terms of use state that their products may not be accessed or collected by automated means (without their prior permission) or attempt to access data that users are not authorised to access, regardless of whether such automated access or collection is carried out while the user is logged into a Facebook account. They also reserve all rights in relation to text mining and data mining. Meta Platform Terms and Conditions further stipulate that developers are not allowed to collect data in an automated way without permission or use of their API. The Meta Content Library and Content Library API provide comprehensive access to the entire public archive of Facebook content. Individuals can request access to the tools from the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) at the University of Michigan (https://transparency.meta.com/sl-si/researchtools/meta-content-library/).

If the comments enjoy copyright protection under the Copyright and Related Rights Act, the texts may not be reproduced or otherwise used unless:

• The author has transferred the relevant material copyright to the user.
• The texts are made available to users under the appropriate licence.
• It is one of the exceptions or substantive limitations to copyright under the law.

Substantive limitations of copyright are only permissible in the cases listed by law (Copyright and Related Rights Act (CRA) 47 to 57d), provided that the scope of such use of copyright works is limited in relation to the purpose to be achieved, that it is in accordance with good usage, that it does not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and that it does not unreasonably conflict with the legitimate interests of the author. In these cases, the author's permission to use the author's work is not required, but the author and the source of the publication must be acknowledged.

One of the exceptions or limitations to copyright is text and data mining for the purposes of scientific research (Article 57b of the Copyright Act and Article 3 of the Directive 2019/790/EU). The GDPR defines text and data mining as any automated analytical technique aimed at analysing text and data in electronic form in order to generate information such as patterns, trends and correlations, including the digitisation of analogue content and remote access to such content, where this is necessary for the purposes of text and data mining (Article 57a).

Research organisations, publicly accessible archives, libraries, museums, film or audio heritage institutions and public service broadcasting organisations, and persons belonging to research organisations and cultural heritage institutions may freely reproduce works to which they have lawful access, subject to the conditions laid down in Article 57.b and carry out text and data mining on works to which they have lawful access for the purposes of scientific research under the conditions of Article 57b, including the digitisation of analogue content and remote access to such content where necessary for the purposes of text and data mining.

The ECHR does not define lawful access, while point 14 of the Recital to Directive 2019/790/EU makes it clear that lawful access covers access to content on the basis of an open access policy or contractual arrangements between rights holders and research organisations or cultural heritage institutions, such as subscriptions, or other lawful means. According to the Directive, lawful access should also cover access to content that is freely available on the Internet.

The preservation of specimens of works made under the conditions of Article 57b(1) and the sharing and making available to the public of the results of text and data mining are further specified in Article 57b of the TMLR. Contractual provisions contrary to Article 57b of the TMLR are null and void.

The protection of personal data must be respected. Comments often contain personal data (e.g. name, location), so the survey must comply with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and other applicable legislation. Under the GDPR, processing of personal data is any operation or set of operations which is performed upon personal data or sets of personal data, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, organisation, structuring, storage, adaptation or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction. The processing of personal data is lawful only if one of the conditions set out in the GDPR is met (in this case, only if the data subject has consented to the processing of his or her personal data).

For the use and research of users' comments on Facebook news feeds, we suggest contacting users, obtaining their comments and obtaining their consent to use the texts sent in the research or contacting Meta about the possibilities and permission for data collection.

Question:

The researcher would like to deposit a book of abstracts from a symposium held at the institute into the institutional repository. For the entry into the repository, she must assign one of the CC licences to the book. As editor, can she choose and assign a CC licence to the entire book herself, or does she need permission from all the authors of the abstracts?

Answer:

A licence can only be granted by the author of the work or the copyright holder, provided that the author has transferred the relevant material copyrights to them for the granting of a specific licence and has permitted its further transfer to third parties.

Question:

In the case of CC licenses, NC (so CC BY-NC) means NonCommercial. Authors would like their work to be used as much as possible, but perhaps not for large profits.

Answer:

NC (non-commercial) means that the primary purpose of the use of the content made available to users under a licence CC BY-NC, no commercial exploitation or monetary compensation. This prohibition applies to the use of the content and not to the user, and thus applies equally to all users. For example, even if the content is used by a non-profit organisation, the use must not be intended for commercial exploitation or monetary compensation. Conversely, commercial entities can use the content, but only if used for non-commercial purposes.

It should be emphasised that licences (including CC BY-NC) do not restrict use that is otherwise permitted under the exceptions and limitations provided by the Copyright and Related Rights Act (ZASP). Section 46 of the ZASP stipulates that limitations on copyright are permissible in the cases specified by law, provided that the scope of such use of copyrighted works is limited to the extent necessary to achieve the intended purpose, is in accordance with good practice, does not conflict with the normal use of the work, and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author. Examples of exceptions and limitations are listed in Articles 47 to 57d and include direct instruction, quotations, etc.

Regardless of the type of licence, the user can always contact the author/rights holder and ask for different permission for use.

Rights Retention Strategy

The cOAlition S, a group of national research funding organisations, published their Rights Retention Strategy (RRS) in July 2020 with the aim of ensuring full and immediate open access to scientific research publications. The RRS enables authors or their employers (e.g. research institutions), when they hold the copyright, to comply with funders' requirements to provide immediate (without embargo) and full open access to the results of scientific research. They achieve this by not transferring their material copyrights exclusively to the publisher, but by retaining a sufficient scope of rights to enable the publication of the Version of Record (VoR) or Author Accepted Manuscript (AAM) in a repository under a Creative Commons CC BY licence.

In Slovenia, the strategy for the preservation of rights is not only part of internal or institutional rules, but has been implemented as an obligation to preserve rights in legislation, more specifically in Law on Scientific Research and Innovation (ZZrID), which is governed in more detail by Regulation on the conduct of scientific research work in accordance with the principles of open science (the Regulation).

ZZrID Article 41 stipulates that open access to research results must be requested and ensured in the context of research co-funded with public resources of at least 50 %. In order to fulfil this obligation, scientific research performers or researchers must reserve an appropriate range of rights. This area is further regulated by Decree, which states that operators shall ensure open access by storing a machine-readable digital version of a published version of a scientific publication (VoR) or an accepted for publication (AAM) peer-reviewed manuscript in a trusted repository for scientific publications and making it immediately open access. Open access shall be made available as soon as practicable and at the latest on publication of the scientific publication. Authors or their employers, where rights are transferred to them, may only transfer copyright in scientific publications to third parties on a non-exclusive basis. They must publish under an open licence that allows anyone to use, modify and share it freely, such as a CC BY or CC BY-SA licence. Exceptions are monographs and scientific publications of comparable length, which may be published under a licence that restricts further commercial use or adaptation of the work, such as the CC BY-NC or CC BY-ND licences.

Secondary Publishing Rights

The use of a copyright work is permissible if the author assigns the relevant copyright to the user or authorises the use of the copyright work by granting a licence. In copyright law, there are two types of transfer of copyright, exclusive and non-exclusive transfer. In the case of an exclusive transfer, the owner uses the work to the exclusion of the author, i.e. only the owner or the rights holder can use the copyright work. In the case of non-exclusive transfer, the rightholder or the rightholder's assignee may use the work in addition to the author or other rightholders in an agreed manner. The author may therefore continue to use the work himself or transfer the rights to someone else.

Where a researcher transfers the material copyright in his or her work exclusively to the publisher, either because the publisher requests it or because the researcher may have done so unknowingly due to ignorance or lack of knowledge in the field, the right of secondary publication allows the researcher, despite the exclusive transfer of copyright to the publisher, to deposit the work in a repository and make it openly available to the public. Several European countries (Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Bulgaria, Spain, France, Belgium) have already included the right of secondary publication in their legislation, although their arrangements differ, but they are unanimous in their view that researchers, as recipients of public funding, have the right of secondary publication, irrespective of any different provisions in the contracts they conclude with publishers.

In Slovenia, the right to secondary publication was included in the legislation by the latest amendment to the Scientific Research and Innovation Activity Act May 2025. ZZrID Article 41(6) and (7) provides that, if the researcher or scientific researcher does not reserve an adequate level of rights to ensure open access to the results of the research and transfers the copyright exclusively to the publisher, the research results may be published or made available to the public in an open access public repository as soon as the research result is accepted for publication, with due acknowledgement of the researcher and the source of the first publication. Contractual provisions to the contrary shall be null and void.

Question:

The right to secondary publication is now legal, so there is no longer any need to check the conditions for publication in https://openpolicyfinder.jisc.ac.uk/? Can we just publish the peer-reviewed manuscript in the repository?

Answer:

In accordance with the right of secondary publication (ZZrID-C, Official Gazette of the RS, No 186/21, 40/23, 102/24 and 40/25), the researcher or the scientific researcher may publish or make available to the public the results of the scientific research activity in an open access public repository as soon as the research result is accepted for publication, with due acknowledgement of the researchers and the source of the first publication. In this case, we usually deposit a peer-reviewed manuscript accepted for publication (AAM) in a public repository, on which the authors (researchers), the licence and the source of the first publication are duly indicated on the additional first blank page (adding a PID link to the article's publication website), without any indication of a delay of public publication (embargo). It is recommended to store in the public repository the AAM of those articles published on the publisher's website from 19 June 2025 onwards (i.e. the published version of the article (VoR) is available on the publisher's website from 19 June 2025 onwards inclusive). The right of secondary publication can only be exercised if at least one of the authors listed on the publication is from an organisation based in Slovenia. The exercise/exercise of the right of secondary publication is discouraged in cases where the VoR is available on the publisher's website before 18 June 2025 inclusive. In the latter case, the AAM is deposited in the public repository in accordance with the terms and conditions stated on the publisher's website or the Open Policy Finder (i.e. compliance with the deferral of public publication/embargo, indication of licenses, etc.).

Question:

Does relying on the right to secondary publication and saving the publication in an open-access repository satisfy the requirements Decree on the Implementation of Scientific Research Work in Accordance with the Principles of Open Science (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, Nos 59/23 and 39/25)?

Answer:

Depositing a scientific publication or other research output in an open-access repository on the basis of the right of secondary publishing (Article 41 of the ZZrID) without an appropriate open licence (as a rule, CC BY or equivalent) only partially satisfies the requirements of the Decree on the Implementation of Scientific Research Work in Accordance with Open Science Principles. The right of secondary publishing under Article 41 of the ZZrID provides authors with a legal basis to deposit the peer-reviewed manuscript (AAM) or the version of record (VoR) in a trusted repository and provide free access regardless of publisher contractual restrictions, thereby fully meeting the technical requirement for deposition and public readability (free access). By exercising the right of secondary publishing (paragraphs 6 and 7 of Article 41 of the ZZrID) and depositing the work in a public repository, you fully comply with the legal requirements regarding enabling open access. However, in addition to ensuring open access, the Decree also requires publication under an open licence that permits re-use (as a rule, CC BY for texts and CC0/CC BY for data and other results). Since the right of secondary publishing does not in itself grant the author the right to unilaterally issue an open licence for the work when economic copyright has been transferred to the publisher or is no longer at their disposal, the work remains accessible in the repository for reading, but not for re-use under the terms of an open licence. It follows from the above that in such a case the obligation to ensure open access in terms of the public accessibility of the publication is fulfilled, while the requirements regarding the open licence objectively cannot be met due to copyright limitations.

Question: The researcher claims to have discovered an article in a selected scientific journal authored by her, but she did not actually write the article. She asks whether this is unfair practice and what action she should take.

Answer:

According to the researcher, an article appeared in the journal with the title given as a comment.

We note the following:

1. Your affiliation is incorrect.
2. The article is tagged with a DOI number, which is stored in CrossRef (https://search.crossref.org/) does not contain a DOI, nor can we resolve the DOI tag with the DOI Fundation tool (https://dx.doi.org/). We conclude that the DOI is fictitious.
3. Although the article states that it is available in the open access under the CC-BY-ND-NC licence, it is not annotated with this licence.
4. The journal lists an ISSN, which is not registered in the ISSN portal.
5. The address where the publishing house is supposed to be located is an office building, but there is no publishing house listed as an occupant. The publisher's contact telephone number contains the national dialling code of another country. We found that this same telephone number is used by another "publishing house", which is supposedly based at an address in another country. This address is a residential building, not a commercial building. There is also no publishing house at this address, but it is an apartment building.
6. The editor of the journal is a professor from a well-known research institution, who is an active researcher in this scientific field and has authored numerous scientific papers in influential scientific journals in this scientific field. We doubt that a researcher with such a scientific work would act as editor of a predatory scientific journal and we believe that his name has also been misused. We further suggested that the researcher contact him and alert him to the situation.

Given the circumstances, the and the pattern of the structure of the "articles" (short reports, single author, and the numerous reports on the internet (e.g. https://retractionwatch.com/2024/06/14/perplexed-authors-identity-forged-on-plagiarized-paper-in-probably-fake-journal/), in our view, this is a case of a predatory publishing house or journal that has misused personal data to give the impression that it is a credible scientific journal and thus to attract other researchers to publish in return for payment of APCs. They tried to mislead other authors by giving their name and supposed contact details and to get them to submit articles. Given the structure of the records, we believe that the production of the texts may have involved the use of artificial intelligence methods.

We propose the following measures:

1. Inform your organisation's management, the Scientific Research and Ethics Committees and, at your discretion, the Legal Service.
2. Your legal service should assess whether the provision of your personal data was a criminal offence. If this is the case, they should take appropriate action (report to the police).
3. Please contact the publisher at ALL the email addresses listed and request the immediate retraction of the article. Make it clear in your letters that you are not the author of the "article" and that this is a misuse of your personal data. Inform them that you will report the infringement to the police.
4. Contact the colleague listed as editor of the Journal of Vasculitis and inform him/her of the matter and request the immediate withdrawal of the article. As mentioned above, we doubt that he is the actual editor, but we suggest that you write to him anyway. If he is not the editor, this will inform him of the false allegations and he will be able to respond accordingly.

Report the fake content to Google and Bing and request that the article be removed from the indexed documents database. The procedure for reporting and removing content from Google's services can be found at the following link https://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905?hl=en, for Bing at https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/concern/bing. Our experts can help you with this too.

Question:
Must authors include a CC license under each of their images in a book? Does the same license apply to images in a book as to the book itself, if not otherwise stated? Can images in a book have a different license than the book?

Answer:

The copyright notice must clearly state under which licence the work is published or made available to the public. If certain content of the work (e.g., images) is made available under a different licence than the rest of the work, this should be evident from the notice (e.g., »unless stated otherwise, the work is published under the licence). CC BY 4.0«Apart from the images, the work is published under a licence CC BY 4.0«In this case, copyright notices must also be provided for images (if they are the same for all, they can be in the same notice, otherwise separately under each image).

Question:

The employee is employed by a public research institution with a 15-%employment status, and within the scope of her primary duties, she collaborates with the economy and conducts research that is 60-% privately funded. In such a case, does she have an obligation to publish in open access?

Answer:

Co-financing from public sources of or more in accordance with Article 41 of the ZZrID refers to research. Therefore, if research is co-financed from public sources in the amount of at least% 50, open access to all research results must be ensured. If a person is employed in a public institution and conducts research within the scope of their employment, this is considered funding from public sources. If research is co-financed from private sources and these represent% 51 or more, the obligation to ensure open access does not apply.

Question:

An article published in a hybrid journal has the following copyright notice:

Copyright © 2025-2027. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.

An ARIS project has been listed. But can we save the AAM version to the repository or do we need to wait until the embargo period is over?

Answer:

If the research leading to the scientific article has been funded by at least 50 % from public sources, the scientific researcher should reserve sufficient rights to deposit the AAM or VoR in a repository under a CC BY or CC BY SA licence prior to publication in a journal, thus ensuring open access (para. 1.41. If this has not been done, the researcher or the scientific research performer may nevertheless publish the article in the repository, in accordance with the right of secondary publication (Article 41(6) of the ICRMD), with due acknowledgement of the researcher and the source of the first publication. The law only provides that the secondary publishing right may publish the work in a repository, but it does not lay down conditions for further use (i.e. that the work may be published under an open licence). For more information on the secondary publishing right, see this section above (tab ”What is meant by the Secondary Publishing Right”).

Unless it is a scientific article resulting from publicly funded research of at least 50 %, the contractor scientific research activity must comply with the provisions of the agreement signed with the publisher, or the general terms and conditions specified on the publisher's website (in your case, a 12-month embargo).

Question: I am looking for a suitable data repository for the "raw" data of an article I intend to publish soon. Despite a lot of sifting and reviewing, it is still not clear where the data would be published. I have looked at RE3DATA and practically all the options on Animal Ecology, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research (87), but have not found the right one (OPENAIR and FAIRSHARING have not yet been able to be reviewed).

I would like to publish data on the seasonal fish diet (zooplankton only) in Lake Constance (Germany). Through RE3DATA I found e.g. FISHBASE, GBIF, Freshwater Biodiv. Data Portal, but all of them only input the distribution of individual species, not the temporal dynamics of the diet.

I've also heard of ZENODO and DRYAD (payable), but I'm not very familiar with them (I'd avoid DIRROS because it's more limited to Slovenia).

Do you have any suggestions on how and where to publish?

Answer:

In this case, it is very likely that a specialised repository for exactly the type of data you have does not exist. In this case, we recommend choosing a general trusted repository. Trusted repositories include:

• Certified repositories (e.g. CoreTrustSeal, DIN 31644, ISO 16363).
• Disciplinary or domain repositories recognised and used by the research community in a specific scientific field (e.g. HEPData, Crystallography Open Database, PubChem, etc.).
• General-purpose and institutional repositories that have the characteristics of trusted repositories (e.g. Zenodo).

Many Slovenian researchers are already using Zenodo. If you use it, you won't go wrong. Zenodo has the advantage of being well-known, free, independent of publishers (managed by CERN) and uses the DataCite and Dublin Core metadata schemas. The disadvantage is that it is not certified and, as far as we know, has no staff to ensure the quality of the data dumped. There are a number of alternatives to Zenod, e.g. Figshare, Dryad (which you also mentioned), Mendeley Data, Harvard Dataverse, etc. Of these, only Mendeley Data is certified, which is also free and includes quality control, but it is not independent (it is run by Elsevier). Dryad is paid for because it is run by an independent non-profit organisation, which covers the costs of its operation. It employs staff to ensure the quality of the data deposited, but is not certified. If we had to choose a repository for our data, we would choose Dryad precisely because of the quality control, but we understand that financial considerations are often a factor and that researchers often prefer to use free repositories. If you have no concerns about an institutional repository, then CTK also recommends 4TU.ResearchData 4TU.ResearchData is not an institutional repository in the strict sense of the word, but a repository of the 4TU.Federation, an association of universities in Wageningen, Twente, Delft and Eindhoven, which is blazing a trail in the handling of research data in Europe. To the best of my knowledge, this repository is open to the whole world. It is free, certified and includes quality control.

Question:  Can you advise me on which subject repository I can publish my data in so that it is peer-reviewed and can be entered into Cobiss? I work at the Faculty of Biotechnics, Department of Forestry; the data are of a quantitative nature (measurements on devices, results of simulation programs, etc.). So far, we have been publishing data in the Zenodo repository.

Answer:

Unfortunately, there is no repository specific to your scientific field that provides peer-reviewed data in the national scientific research area. To a certain extent, peer review processes are carried out by the following repositories Dryad and 4TU.ResearchData. Repository Dryad is classified as a general repository, which carries out the processes of curating, preserving and publishing data. Please note, however, that their business model is based on DPC (Data Publishing Charge), which depends on the number of datasets and the amount of data published.

4TU.ResearchData is recommended for researchers in the natural sciences and engineering in case there is no domain-specific repository in the chosen research area. The repository is managed by Delft University. This model is also based on DPC, which depends on the size of the data. Up to 5 GB there is no DPC charge, above 5 GB there is a one-off charge of 4,50 EUR/GB. More information on the DPC charge is available at at the link (Costs section).

Please also note the following:

• The bibliographic processing of your research data in COBISS does not necessarily require that the data be archived in a subject-specific repository.
• It is difficult to claim that the case of domain-specific repositories is a classic content review. In the vast majority of cases, it is more a review of the relevance of the metadata, the description of the provenance of the data, the use of appropriate vocabularies to describe the data formats, etc., rather than a substantive characterisation of the data itself. If you would like to obtain a substantive review of the methodology used to generate your data, we encourage you to publish a data article. This can be done in specific scientific journals (e.g. Data in Brief...). In case your research is funded by Horizon2020 or Horizon Europe, you can also do this for free in Open Research Europe, in the form of Data Notes. To the best of our knowledge, you can also publish your data in most other scientific journals, but not necessarily all of them.

Question:

The project (targeted research programme) will not generate new data, as the researchers will use only existing (small modular reactor technology), publicly available sources (websites, legislation, regulations) and will use this to prepare a report for the Ministry. In such a case, how to complete the NRRP form, in particular the sections on data storage and the provision of data in a FAIR manner, as the data used will be secondary sources only.

Answer:

Cases without any new data are rare, as even the use of secondary sources often results in derived or compiled data (e.g. calculations, categorisations) that are considered new research data and should be treated in accordance with the FAIR principles, subject to licensing restrictions. It should therefore first be checked that the project will not really generate new data. If it is simply a matter of summarising publicly available sources without creating new data structures, no further publication of the data is necessary.

In any case, the NRRP should describe:
- how the data used (including secondary data) will be stored and backed up,
- any licensing or ethical restrictions on access,
- publish at least the metadata.

Question: Are articles with no authors from Slovenia or no authors with a researcher code also entered into COBISS, dCOBISS and the repository? The articles were produced in the context of a joint research project from Austria and Slovenia. Some articles have only Austrian authors and only an Austrian funder. The researchers consider that, on the basis of point 15 Call for (co-)funding of research projects 2025 it is also necessary to enter such articles.

As no such articles have been entered so far, or OSIC has requested the deletion of the typology if they have been entered, I would like to ask for clarification.

Answer:

As this is an ARIS request, we suggest you contact them for further clarification. Ideally, the funders should be contacted by the researchers themselves.

For entries in COBISS, dCOBISS and the repository, if there are no Slovenian authors listed among the authors, there is no need for an entry. Requirement of point 15 Call for (co-)funding of research projects 2025 refers to the entry of publications produced in the framework of national research projects. The project in question (N1-0111) is an international project, for which it is useful to check whether the call documentation contains the same requirements as those set out in the call for proposals for the (co)financing of research projects.

OSICs do not request the deletion of a typology on the grounds that "there are no authors from Slovenia or no authors with a researcher code". To the extent that OSIC has requested the deletion of a typology in any case, there must have been some other reason. The assignment of the typology and its verification is based on uniform criteria, regardless of the composition of the authors. However, it is true that OSIC does not automatically list for verification records that do not contain any author with a researcher code. If there is a need to verify such a record, OSIC should be asked to do so, and it should be assessed and verified according to exactly the same criteria as any other record. We hope that we have understood the question correctly and explained it accordingly.

Question:

Why use the new term citizen science and not amateur, citizen or other ?

Answer:

"Civic" is derived from the term "citizen", which refers to an individual as a member of a community. The term citizen goes beyond the administrative understanding of a municipality. It is the most inclusive, irrespective of the emotional element of personal enjoyment (amateur), legal status (civic), individuality of actors (community) and others.

The use of the term citizen science has also become established in professional and political usage in Slovenia, both in legislation and in national strategies and calls for tenders.

The appropriate translation of this term has been substantiated by the academic Prof. Dr. Zdravko Mlinar in his work:
Mlinar, Zdravko (2021). What does the Citizen Science concept and movement bring us?: making research a part of everyday life. Journal of Science Criticism, 2021, vol. 49, no. 282, pp. 23-63.

Question:

What does a project have to include to be considered a citizen science project?

Answer:

In 2015, the European Science Association (ECSA) adopted the 10 principles of citizen science. These principles have also been endorsed by Science Europe, thus confirming the credibility of the principles and of citizen science as a legitimate process of scientific research.

Question:

The Society has published several technical books that it would like to make more accessible to other users. We would like to publish PDFs of these books so that users can download and use them electronically.

What are the chances of dumping the PDFs somewhere where it would be a serious website and visible in search engines. Where are such trusted sites? How is this done?

Answer:

There are several possible solutions for the above, and further information is needed to select the appropriate one:

1. Books listed on the Society's website: they appear to be copyrighted - when publishing a book, it is first necessary to sort out the copyright issues and obtain all the necessary consents for publishing an e-version of an already published book.
2. Public access to full texts can also refer to multiple rights of use on the part of the readers, i.e. open access, which is usually regulated by licences (e.g. Creative Commons) - a licence for further use must also be negotiated with the authors.

Other books already published, as well as new ones, need to be regulated in the same way before they are published on the web - a clear definition of the right of further use.

There are, of course, several options for publishing, but the decision to go down a particular route depends on the objectives or needs.

One is to store the full text (with copyright etc.) in a trusted repository that meets technical standards and allows for connectivity and thus visibility in search engines. CTK coordinates Digital Repository of Slovenian Research Organisations (DiRROS), which brings together several research institutions or societies and offers archiving possibilities for individual researchers. DiRROS is a single entry point for access to electronic forms of scientific and professional works, reports, research data and other materials produced by research organisations or by individual researchers and artists who do not have the possibility of publishing (archiving) and preserving electronic resources. DiRROS offers the service of publishing and preserving various electronic documents free of charge. Compatibility with OpenAIRE guidelines ensures content sharing with other repositories, visibility on the National Open Science Portal (openscience.si).

The publication data is first entered into COBISS (for a fee according to the CTK price list) and then, if desired, the full text is archived in DiRROS.

However, if you are working with IJS, we could also help you through their library, with which we have a good collaboration (IJS is a member of DiRROS), and the publications would then be published as research outputs "under the institution" of IJS.

Of course, as an association you can join DiRROS on your own and publish your "issues" under your name (no cost, just sign the accession agreement).

A further consultation is appropriate to find a suitable solution.

Question:

Several projects are mentioned in the article. Which ones should be listed in the repository and dCOBISS*? Only those involving researchers from our institution? How about enrolmentif there is no project mentioned in the article? Why is the entry in dCOBISS make sense at all?

Answer:

Institutional repositories and dCOBISS record all data or metadata about the research projects in the same order as they appear in the publication. Project and funder metadata (project/programme code and title, and funder name) are usually located in a separate section (e.g. Funding or Acknowledgements) in the published text of the articles. Through code lists (e.g. SICRIS oz. OpenAIRE), the metadata is entered automatically, while the others require manual entry.

If the metadata on projects and funders is not mentioned in the text of the publication, care should be taken to ensure that it is also included in the publication, which is usually done by the authors. Once the publication has been completed, the bibliographic record can be edited correctly.

Comprehensive data recording in dCOBISS, vcrucially, by entering open access metadata (licence, publication version, status and APC cost amount), it contributes significantly to open science monitoring or open access analytics.

*Access is possible by entering the library acronym, username and password.

Question:

Is it necessary to enter also closed articles or only their metadata in dCOBISS ? Or is it also necessary to enter projects in this case?

 Answer:

According to the User's Guide (in short: the User's Guide), it is mandatory to enter metadata for works in dCOBISS:
- which are digital objects,
- are the result of a project co-financed by Slovenian or EU public funding (as indicated in the source itself), whether open access publications (publications with an open/free licence), open access publications (publications that are read-only, without an open/free licence) or closed publications; and
- when works are deposited (or primarily published) in a trusted repository.

If it is a closed publication resulting from publicly funded research and for which no secondary publication right has been exercised (i.e. the work is not deposited in a trusted repository), metadata entry in dCOBISS (including projects) is recommended. The guidance also states that if a publication does not meet any of the conditions for being an open access publication, the entry should be skipped and the remaining metadata, including project metadata, should be entered.

Question:

How to enter research data in dCOBISS if it is not a digital object (according to typology 2.20), e.g. a non-digital object is also research data that the author states is held by him/herself and is available upon reasonable request.

Answer:

In accordance with Article 4 Decree on the Implementation of Scientific Research Work in Accordance with the Principles of Open Science (Official Journal of the RS, No 59/23 and 39/25), metadata on research data must in any case be made public.

The actual practice of publication and inventorying varies greatly between institutions. Presumably, in your case, it is digital research data anyway, but the author cannot make it publicly available for good reasons.

However, you can create a metadata record that tells the public that the data exists and which institution to contact for possible access, by:
- without any digital objects attached, or possibly just a ReadMe file.
- with accompanying digital objects, may be restricted access (embargoed/permanently inaccessible/access on request).

Question:

We are a Slovenian scientific society that has been publishing a periodical scientific journal with articles in Slovenian for 75 years. The journal is published 5 times a year in printed form, and since 2005 it has been published on our website. The journal is also archived in dLib-u.

Authors agree that their contribution to the journal is open access under licence CC BY-NC 4.0, including from 2025 onwards.

The website will be redesigned in line with the Open Journal Systems template (free and open source software for managing peer-reviewed academic journals).

The journal is also funded by ARIS, which requires open access to peer-reviewed scientific publications as part of the Call for Proposals for the Co-financing of the Publication of Domestic Scientific Periodicals in 2025 and 2026.

What do we need to do to ensure that the journal meets these requirements and that the articles are deposited in an institutional repository?

Answer:

It is noticeable that there is a clear intention to change the publishing policy of your journal from subscription to open access. Using the OJS platform, you can describe your publishing policy very clearly and transparently.

We suggest that you take the following into account when organising the publishing policy of the journal:

• Regulating the publishing policy according to the requirements of the funder - in line with national legislation (e.g. Law on scientific research and innovation oz. Decree on the Implementation of Scientific Research Work in Accordance with the Principles of Open Science) and the relevant calls for tenders.
• A clear description of the publishing policy itself (e.g. conditions for accepting and processing manuscripts, peer review process, composition of the editorial board, publication procedure, ethical standards, manuscript submission, indicative time for reviewing manuscripts, instructions for preparing the manuscripts).
• A description of the open access policy:
  - The mode of publication of the journal - as it is intended to be an open access journal, the open access model (e.g. gold or diamond) should be specified.
  - Information on the cost of publishing the article (the exact APC cost, to the extent charged by the journal, or if none, an indication that it is at no cost).
  - Copyright - the publisher of an open-access journal receives permission from the authors of the articles to publish, and the authors of the articles retain the copyright.
• Indication of the licences granting open access - further use of the work is permitted in accordance with the licences chosen. Creative Commons. The reference to the chosen licence should be clearly stated in the articles and on its website.
• Indexing of the journal - indexing in an international database is recommended Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), which includes only open access journals. To be included in the database, a journal must meet the basic criteria, which are also listed on the DOAJ website: https://doaj.org/apply/guide.
• Storage in a repository - as soon as possible, or at the latest on publication of the scientific publication, the machine-readable digital form of the published version of the scientific publication (VoR) or peer-reviewed manuscript (AAM) accepted for publication is stored in a trusted repository.
• dissemination of the digital copy – as far as the publication of scientific publications is co-financed by ARIS, the digital copy of the journal must, in accordance with Legal deposit act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 69/06 and 86/09) oz. subject to the conditions of previous public calls for co-financing the publication of domestic periodic scientific publications, submit in the prescribed format to the portal Digital libraries of Slovenia.

Question:

Is it sufficient if the Creatve Commons licence and the copyright notice in a monograph or proceedings only appear in the colophon, or is it better to have them appear on all papers, as is the practice in journals?

Answer:

For the sake of transparency and quality of information to the user about the copyright use of the subject work, it is reasonable to indicate the copyright notice and the licence of use of the copyright work (e.g. CC BY) on:

1. in the colophon of a scientific book publication; and
2. in the footer or header of a chapter.

Question: 

Do the licence and the licence icon (i.e. for Creative Commons licences) need to be inserted only in digital versions of publications or in both digital and print versions?

Answer:

In accordance with Article 41  Scientific Research and Innovation Activity Act (Official Journal of the Republic of Slovenia 186/21, 40/23, 102/24 and 40/25), all peer-reviewed scientific publications co-funded with public resources of at least 50 % must be open access, which is by definition digital and accessible online without restrictions (immediate access in a repository, without embargo).

Creative Commons licences are mainly embedded in digital versions (on the publisher's website, in .pdf format in a repository, etc.), together with metadata.

For printed (physical) versions, the law does not require the insertion of a CC licence. A print publication can be published in a traditional publishing format (with a normal copyright) if there is a digital version that is open access under an open licence (e.g. CC BY or CC BY-SA). The main aim is to ensure open digital access, not necessarily to convert every print edition.

Recommended good practices:

• In digital publications (online, in repositories), a clear indication of the licence (e.g. CC-BY; with icon and text) is mandatory for all works that have received more than 50 % of public funding, whether chapters/articles in single issues or full issues.
  Example of an indication:
  © 2026 Author(s). This article is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Attribution 4.0 International - Sharing on Equal Terms (CC BY-SA 4.0).
• there is no legal obligation to do so for the printed version, but for clarity, if there is a printed version as well as a digital version, it is recommended to insert the licence.

Question:

As part of the project, a monograph of scientific contributions is being created. We kindly ask for your help in resolving the following dilemma: we have received a contribution for reprinting that was already published in a selected scientific journal under a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Our question is whether the license dictates reprinting in the original appearance of the contribution using the publisher's template. It would be acceptable for us if the reprinting of the unaltered content could be carried out in our publication's format for technical reasons.

Answer:

Under licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 Authors allow reproduction and sharing of the content in any medium and format provided that the author and a link to the licence are suitably credited, that the content is not used for commercial purposes and that the content is not modified.

Given the information given, we think you can remove the template of the publisher where the paper was originally published and change the format. However, you must correctly identify the authors, the copyright notice, the licence notice, where the work was first published and the link to the original publication.

Question: We have a question regarding the publication of translations of articles that originally appeared in scientific journals. The Slovenian translations will be published in a monograph, which will initially be released as a PDF on the publisher's e-book website. However, it will also receive a free print edition. We have obtained all necessary permissions for the translations. Is it necessary to also cite the primary document within the publication, or is it sufficient for this to be mentioned in the editorial introduction?

Answer: The translation of an author's work is considered to be a transformation of an author's work under the Slovenian Copyright and Related Rights Act (Article 7 of the Copyright Act). In order to transform an author's work, the transformer (e.g. translator) must obtain the relevant material copyright from the copyright owner of the original work, if the work is not available under a licence that permits such a transformation. We understand that you have made this arrangement. A translation is an independent work of authorship if it is an individual intellectual creation in the field of literature, science and art, but the exploitation of a new work always exploits both works (ZASP Commentary, 1997). In the way you will refer to the original works (authors, titles, sources, licences, if any), it is essential, in our view, that the link between the particular translation and the particular original work is clear. For the sake of transparency, clarity and unambiguity that a particular article (or part of a monograph) is a translation of a particular work by another author, it would be useful to indicate the original work of authorship for each translation or part of a monograph.