[okfn-discuss] [open-science] SPARC author addendum uses CC-NC licence and now all hybrid publishers have followed

Sun Dec 11 14:23:49 UTC 2011

On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:25 PM, <philippe.aigrain at sopinspace.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Just a point of notice. In the case of hybrid publishing between OA and
> paper versions, and in particular for OA monographs, it is perfectly
> understandable that licenses forbid commercial exploitation of paper
> versions. Unfortunately the CC licenses do not allow provisions such as
> commercial use permitted for electronic versions and reserved for paper
> versions. One should find a workaround this.
>
> I'm not sure I understand this. It's the individual article or chapter
that would be licensed, not the complete work (monograph or journal issue).
The re-user would have to copy the paper either as a photocopy or
retyping/redrawing but I don't see how that requires the licensor to have
greater rights.

Best,
>
> Philippe
> > On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Heather Joseph <heather at arl.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Excellent question, and thanks thanks to Peter for raising this point.
> >> SPARC's Steering Committee is meeting tomorrow, and I will put this
> >> item at the top of our list for discussion. If, as I suspect, they
> >> want to do an update, I'll will be in touch with Mike Carroll pronto
> >> for assistance.
> >>
> >
> > Thanks Heather,
> > Have you seen the almost universal CC-NC  that Ross Mounce has
> accumulated
> > for hybridOA? We have to change this now or we will spend a decade trying
> > to recover the ground
> >
> >
> >> Very important issue. Again, my thanks for raising it!
> >>
> >> H.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >> On Dec 11, 2011, at 7:51 AM, Daniel Mietchen
> >> <daniel.mietchen at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > OK, so what's the process of updating this author addendum?
> >> > Daniel
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> I have discovered to my surprise and disappointment that the SPARC/SC
> >> author
> >> >> addendum for scholarly publishing requests the publisher to allow the
> >> author
> >> >> to distribute their work under a CC-NC or equivalent licence. The
> >> addendum
> >> >> was created as a joint activity between Science Commons and SPARC
> >> (copied).
> >> >> http://www.arl.org/sparc/author/addendum.shtml
> >> >> and
> >> >> http://www.arl.org/sparc/bm~doc/Access-Reuse_Addendum.pdf
> >> >>
> >> >> 4. Author’s Retention of Rights. Notwithstanding any terms in the
> >> >> Publication Agreement to the contrary, AUTHOR and
> >> >> PUBLISHER agree that in addition to any rights under copyright
> >> retained
> >> by
> >> >> Author in the Publication Agreement, Author
> >> >> retains: (i) the rights to reproduce, to distribute, to publicly
> >> perform,
> >> >> and to publicly display the Article in any medium for noncommercial
> >> >> purposes; (ii) the right to prepare derivative works from the
> >> Article;
> >> and
> >> >> (iii) the right to authorize others to make
> >> >> any non-commercial use of the Article so long as Author receives
> >> credit
> >> as
> >> >> author and the journal in which the Article has been
> >> >> published is cited as the source of first publication of the Article.
> >> For
> >> >> example, Author may make and distribute copies in the
> >> >> course of teaching and research and may post the Article on personal
> >> or
> >> >> institutional Web sites and in other open-access digital
> >> >> repositories.
> >> >>
> >> >> This was crafted in 2006 and since then there is abundant evidence
> >> and
> >> >> argument that CC-NC is extremely limiting (e.g. no permission to use
> >> >> diagrans in textbooks and also unworkable). We have heard on this
> >> list
> >> that
> >> >> CC are considering an option to retire CC-NC.
> >> >>
> >> >> The addendum was primarily crafted for cases where the author did not
> >> pay
> >> >> for publication. Yet almost all publishers now licence PAID "open
> >> Access" as
> >> >> CC-NC.
> >> >>
> >> >> Michael Carroll (copied) was one of the authors of the SPARC addendum
> >> but
> >> >> now argues strongly for "full open Access" - i.e. libre-OA, OKD
> >> compliant:
> >> >>
> >>
> http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001210
> >> >> Yet CC-NC is becoming more common, not less, in paid "Open Access". I
> >> do not
> >> >> know why this is happening but the publishers are using CC-NC even
> >> with
> >> fees
> >> >> of up to 5000 USD per article. The more that this is allowed to
> >> happen
> >> >> unchallenged, the more we destroy any hope of real Open access, even
> >> when
> >> >> paid by funders.
> >> >>
> >> >> P.
> >> >> --
> >> >> Peter Murray-Rust
> >> >> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> >> >> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> >> >> University of Cambridge
> >> >> CB2 1EW, UK
> >> >> +44-1223-763069
> >> >>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> open-science mailing list
> >> >> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> >> >> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> >> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Peter Murray-Rust
> > Reader in Molecular Informatics
> > Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> > University of Cambridge
> > CB2 1EW, UK
> > +44-1223-763069
> > _______________________________________________
> > okfn-discuss mailing list
> > okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
>

-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20111211/f275cc99/attachment.html>