We have had a paper accepted with Mathematische Annalen (Springer). As my university has an open access agreement with Springer, the paper will be published as (gold) open access, with a Creative Commons license. However, when asked to sign the license agreement, it contains the following paragraph:
Immediately after acceptance the Author may deposit the Accepted Manuscript to any location, and under any terms (including, but not limited to, under a CC BY licence), provided it is not made publicly available until after publication. The Author will include an acknowledgement in the Accepted Manuscript, together with a link to the Version of Record on the publisher’s website: “This version of the article has been accepted for publication, after peer review (when applicable) but is not the Version of Record and does not reflect post-acceptance improvements, or any corrections. The Version of Record is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/[insert DOI]”.
If the paper is being published open access (which is paid for through the licensing agreement), why are we asked to agree not to upload the accepted manuscript? Why should we be restricted in the wording used in how to acknowledge the "version of record"? Why should we not be allowed to publish it with post-acceptance improvements, if we retain the copyright?
[There is also a paragraph about the "submitted manuscript", stating that this may be made available but that the author must include a specific acknowledgement that this manuscript has not undergone peer review or any post-submission improvements.]
I don't recall such a requirement in previous Open Access agreements. It seems that it would potentially leave us with fewer rights to use the article in which we retain copyright than others who are free to use it under the CC BY license!
Has anyone else seen this type of wording, and experience of how to deal with it? My first reaction is to strike out this part of the license agreement and sign (by hand) without it.