[Open-access] SSRN Paper from Google Policy Unit

Wed Jul 18 13:11:49 UTC 2012

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Mike Taylor <mike at indexdata.com> wrote:

> On 18 July 2012 13:54, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> Hi Cameron,
> >>
> >> Thanks. The paper now checks as CC-BY 3.0 !!
> >
> > I think many repositories ritually add CC-NC because they think it's the
> > right thing to do.
>
> This is spot on. I think a lot of us have so fully absorbed the BOAI
> that we've forgotten what a tremendously seductive idea an NC clause
> is to people coming to open access for the first time. Sorting that
> out is going to be one activities of the next five years. (In Britain,
> UKRC's new policy is going to be a big help.)
>

There are at least two - and possibly more areas where we should challenge
NC:
* publishers who offer "gold" or "full-OA", sometimes through
incompetence/ignorance (e.g. copying what other  publishers do)
* repositories who do this because it's the "natural thing" for academics
to do (and for some of them they haven't any horizons beyond the ivory tower
* non-profits who traditionally collect or are given info and this is a
hold on their established powerbase

I think it could be very useful to have a one-page doc to send to these
people explaing why NC is not appropriate or effective. Otherwise we all
write something different and look uncoordinated

P.

> -- Mike.
>

-- 
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/open-access/attachments/20120718/c29c70d3/attachment.html>