[Open-access] ORCiD and Libraries

Reimer, Torsten F t.reimer at imperial.ac.uk
Tue Jul 7 16:31:50 UTC 2015

Well, it seems that Cameron has made the point for me. I should add that I am currently affiliated with ORCID, as a member of the communications steering group. I joined that group recently, after we had rolled out ORCID to academic and research staff at Imperial College.

The reason we have engaged with ORCID is that we think it has a role to play with regards to open access. The UK is currently experimenting with feeding metadata and manuscripts to institutional systems from the publishers. ORCID iDs would be very useful in linking “author identities” on the publisher systems to “research identities” on institutional systems.

I take Thomas’s point that ORCID is not an open access solution per se, but it can help with open access.


From: Cameron Neylon [mailto:cn at cameronneylon.net]
Sent: 07 July 2015 16:50
To: Thomas Krichel
Cc: Reimer, Torsten F; Vignoli Michela; open-access at lists.okfn.org
Subject: Re: [Open-access] ORCiD and Libraries

The ORCID source code is available (mostly MIT licensed) at:

Regular data dump (although only annually at the moment):

And of course the public data is available from the public API endpoint as well all under a ccZero waiver. That’s only public data, but non-public data is that which is restricted by the user, not by anyone else. The restrictions are for privacy reasons. It is possible for a user to choose to only share with certain data with specific other parties but again that was a privacy consideration rather than anything else.

It’s also worth noting that ORCID is one of the few organisations that has adopted a set of governance and operations principles. The point of these principles was to do two things: seek to have representative governance (which is hard to achieve but good to work towards) and make it possible in principle to fork the entire project.


It’s not perfect by any means. One could quibble about the makeup of the board (not enough researcher representatives, not enough geographic spread) the frequency of data dumps, the decisions about exactly what goes in the member’s SLA-backed API and what in the public one. But overall it does a pretty good job of being transparent and open at the same time (plenty do one or the other, very few do both).

Full disclosure: I have no current relationship with ORCID but was involved in early discussions in setting up and various committees looking at adoption in various places. I also applied for the job of Exec Director when it was first advertised (and didn’t get it, Laure has done a much better job than I could have).



Cameron Neylon
cn at cameronneylon.net<mailto:cn at cameronneylon.net> - http://cameronneylon.net
@cameronneylon - http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0068-716X

On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Thomas Krichel <krichel at openlib.org<mailto:krichel at openlib.org>> wrote:

Reimer, Torsten F writes

> - The code is open source.

What code is open source? I'm not aware of any code out there that
would allow users to make parallel installations of ORCID.

> Therefore I find the characterisation a little harsh.

It is. But I think we can all agree that it is not an open
access system.



Thomas Krichel http://openlib.org/home/krichel

open-access mailing list
open-access at lists.okfn.org<mailto:open-access at lists.okfn.org>
Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-access/attachments/20150707/eb60464d/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the open-access mailing list