[Open-access] Fwd: A publisher writes...

Wed Apr 25 14:44:37 UTC 2012

Additional correspondence with Royal Society of Chemistry (as already
published to List)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Richard Kidd <KiddR at rsc.org>
Date: Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Open-access] A publisher writes...
To: Mike Taylor <mike at indexdata.com>
Cc: "open-access at lists.okfn.org" <open-access at lists.okfn.org>

Hi Mike

But the communication says

"Unfortunately any other reply than YES by 2012-03-15 will be regarded as
unacceptable for the purposes of Hargreaves."

Which is all about a specific stance, isn't it? The only data is whether we
agree with a request to mine, yes or no, and is put in the context of
showing Hargreaves the benefits of mining. So as an information gathering
exercise on policy I'm not sure it'll work.

In other news, there was a CCC meeting on Data and Text Mining in Amsterdam
last week, and a draft cross-publisher mining license has been prepared for
discussion with the pharma people; there's also a working group on a common
text mining format.

Best wishes

Richard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sauropoda at gmail.com [mailto:sauropoda at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Mike Taylor
> Sent: 08 March 2012 10:15
> To: Richard Kidd
> Cc: open-access at lists.okfn.org
> Subject: Re: [Open-access] A publisher writes...
>
> Hi, Richard.
>
> The point of Peter's submission is not really to argue for any
> specific stance, but just to document what publishers' stances
> actually ARE.  It's an attempt to get publishers to be open about what
> their policies are -- something that one would think they can hardly
> object to -- so that we know where we stand, what further negotiations
> might be profitable, and whether other recommendations should be made
> elsewhere.
>
> In short: it's a data-gathering exercise, not an argument.
>
> -- Mike.

>
>
>
> On 8 March 2012 09:59, Richard Kidd <KiddR at rsc.org> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm just wondering whaat you're trying to achieve here. Your're
> preparing a submission from representatives on this list. As Peter said
> in reply to my question on his blog, this is your submission to
> Hargreaves, its not a negotiation. Publishers will also be putting
> forward their own nuanced submissions. This group also doesn't include
> other major text mining experts, so I would also ask that this should
> be presented as an OKFN or similar submission rather than the agreed
> text miners' bottom line - so I'm not convinced that I want to reply to
> this, to have yes/no/unhelpful reflected up to IPO as our views, when
> we'll be putting in our own submissions.
> >
> > Best wishes
> >
> > Richard
> >
> > DISCLAIMER:
> >
> > This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the
> use of the addressee only and may contain confidential, privileged or
> copyright material. It may not be relied upon or disclosed to any other
> person without the consent of the RSC. If you have received it in
> error, please contact us immediately. Any advice given by the RSC has
> been carefully formulated but is necessarily based on the information
> available, and the RSC cannot be held responsible for accuracy or
> completeness. In this respect, the RSC owes no duty of care and shall
> not be liable for any resulting damage or loss. The RSC acknowledges
> that a disclaimer cannot restrict liability at law for personal injury
> or death arising through a finding of negligence. The RSC does not
> warrant that its emails or attachments are Virus-free: Please rely on
> your own screening. The Royal Society of Chemistry is a charity,
> registered in England and Wales, number 207890 - Registered office:
> Thomas Graham House, Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge CB4 0WF
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > open-access mailing list
> > open-access at lists.okfn.org
> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access

DISCLAIMER:

This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of
the addressee only and may contain confidential, privileged or copyright
material. It may not be relied upon or disclosed to any other person
without the consent of the RSC. If you have received it in error, please
contact us immediately. Any advice given by the RSC has been carefully
formulated but is necessarily based on the information available, and the
RSC cannot be held responsible for accuracy or completeness. In this
respect, the RSC owes no duty of care and shall not be liable for any
resulting damage or loss. The RSC acknowledges that a disclaimer cannot
restrict liability at law for personal injury or death arising through a
finding of negligence. The RSC does not warrant that its emails or
attachments are Virus-free: Please rely on your own screening. The Royal
Society of Chemistry is a charity, registered in England and Wales, number
207890 - Registered office: Thomas Graham House, Science Park, Milton Road,
Cambridge CB4 0WF

_______________________________________________
open-access mailing list
open-access at lists.okfn.org
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access

-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069

-- 
Naomi Lillie
Foundation Administrator and Community Coordinator (Open Bibliography)
Open Knowledge Foundation
http://okfn.org/
Skype: n.lillie
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-access/attachments/20120425/3cf435d6/attachment.html>