The document discusses digital preservation from the perspective of a publisher. It notes that digital information is impermanent, lasting only 5 years, so preservation is important to ensure long-term availability of content. It outlines preservation options like national archives, institutional repositories, and product solution archives. It provides examples of different repositories and how they vary in mission, funding, deposit policies, and access controls. The document uses SAGE as a case study, explaining how they work with repositories like Portico, LOCKSS, and CLOCKSS to preserve journal backfiles and ensure perpetual access for customers.

1. Preservation
A Publisher’s Perspective
Carol Richman
Director of Licensing
SAGE Publications
SSP May 2008

2. Why should we care?
“These timescales of many decades, even
centuries, contrast with the typical 5-year lifetime
for computing hardware and digital media…”
“A Fresh Look at the Reliability of Long­term Digital Storage.” Baker,
Mary, et al.. EuroSys '06, April 18­21, 2006
SSP May 2008

3. Why Care?
Preservation: Digital information is
impermanent
• Publisher: Safety
– to insure ongoing availability of your
content
• Librarians: Custodianship
– to insure continuity of the record of
scientific progress
– Very long view: epistemology, history of
science and culture
SSP May 2008

4. What Should be Preserved?
• Scholarly content
• Research materials
• Web-based, digitally born content
SSP May 2008

5. Preservation options
• National archives
– Dutch National library (KB)
– British Library
– NIH – PubMedCentral?
– Library of Congress?
• Institutional Repositories
• Community-based Archives
• Product Solution Archives
SSP May 2008

6. Summary Table
Agency Primary Data A/C Migration
Mission
KB Gov’t Preservation Pub Twilight Yes
Portico Ind. Failsafe Pub Dark Yes
LoC Gov’t Preservation Pub ? ?
LOCKSS Inst. Failsafe Pub Dark -
CLOCKSS Comm. Failsafe Pub Dark -
SSP May 2008

7. Summary:
How Repositories Differ
• Stated purpose
• Dark v. light
• Complete backfile v. current only
• Deposits
– Who: author v. publisher
– What: manuscripts v. final work
– Why: voluntary v. mandated
• Rights transfer
• Access control
• Costs
SSP May 2008

8. Preservation
A SAGE Example
SSP May 2008

9. SAGE and Preservation
• SAGE’s commitment to customers and
partners
• Critical to society arrangements
• Essential for new e-sales (consortia +
single institutions) – Perpetual access
• Business continuity
• Long-term preservation
• We are not preservation experts!
SSP May 2008

10. SAGE and Preservation
• Dutch KB
• CLOCKSS
• LOCKSS
• Portico
• Library of Congress
• British Library
SSP May 2008

11. How we do it
• Provide details of digital availability
• Provide sample of content
• Provide details of content format (DTD)
• Send all backfile for loading
• Set up content flow for ongoing content
SSP May 2008

12. Not just a technical exercise!
SAGE and it’s trigger event. . .
SSP May 2008

13. GRAFT -
• Discontinued title due to lack of subscription base
• Opted to release to archives – Portico, CLOCKSS,
and the KB
• Portico took lead on releasing the archive first and
assuming responsibility for DOIs
• Portico only archive currently able to handle DOIs
• SAGE assigned DOIs to Portico for re-deposit to
CrossRef
• CLOCKSS released weeks after; Dutch KB yet to
release
SSP May 2008

14. Challenges - DOIs
• Archives (Portico) had not had to deposit for released content before
– no precedence set
• Under current CrossRef rules, Portico is the owner of the DOIs.
Portico is working with the CrossRef Board to determine the best
method for other archives to take advantage of the DOI work that
Portico has done.
• Multiple resolution does not currently work so only Portico will have
pointers from CrossRef
• All DOIs had not been deposited for content; no precedence set for
how to handle this
• Some articles had not DOIs – who should assign and under what
DOI prefix?
• CrossRef had to create working group to create guidelines for how to
deal with the release of content to archives (SAGE involved in
working group)
SSP May 2008

15. Market Reaction
• SAGE and Portico released press releases and
posted to list serves
• Librarians took positively and negatively
• Positive
– System appears to work for the release from dark archive
– Content remains available in perpetuity
– SAGE acted responsibly by releasing journal to archive
– DOIs will remain active for content; minimal confusion
• Negative
– SAGE ceased publication on a journal
SSP May 2008

16. SSP May 2008

17. SSP May 2008

18. SSP May 2008

19. SSP May 2008

20. SSP May 2008

21. SSP May 2008

22. SSP May 2008

23. Thank You!
Contact info:
carol.richman@sagepub.com
www.sagepub.com
SSP May 2008