April’s top tip: How to avoid getting surprised by your quarterly deposit invoice
After the quarterly deposit invoices went out last month we had a couple of queries from members who had registered a lot of backlist content, but had been charged at the current years rate.
After investigating, we discovered this was because the metadata registered looked as though the content was current, despite the fact that it was backlist. To help avoid this in future we felt a timely reminder was needed about the importance of accurate and complete metadata for publication dates.
About current and backlist content registration fees
There are different fees for registering content depending on whether it’s current (this year and the previous two years) or backlist (older than that). As an example, it’s $1 for each current journal article, and $0.15 for each backlist journal article. So, if you’ve incorrectly registered your content as 2018 when it’s actually from 2012, your quarterly invoice will reflect this, and overcharge you.
Determining whether content is current or backlist
A record is determined to be either a back year or current year deposit based on the metadata that you deposit with us. If you use our web deposit form, the system looks at the information you’ve entered into the “publication date” field. If you deposit XML with us, it looks at the date in the <publication_date> element. And we look at each individual item separately—so even if you’ve put a publication date at journal level, you still need to put it at the journal article level too.
What to do if you’ve registered the wrong publication date
As you can only update a publication date by running a full re-deposit, it’s important to get it right first time. If you have registered the wrong publication date and have received an invoice for the wrong amount, please re-deposit your content and then get in contact with us. If you do this as soon as you spot the error, we’ll be able to send a new invoice for the correct amount.