[Open-access] [open-science] how open is it

[Mike Taylor]

Strong agreement here. There is enormous value in organisations using
CC BY, not only because it's a good licence but because everyone who
cares about such issues already knows what it means. Instant
recognition is very valuable. No-one wants to read pages of legalese
only to emerge on the other side thinking, "Oh, so it's just like CC
BY, then".

-- Mike.



On 26 September 2012 08:08, cameronneylon.net <cn at cameronneylon.net> wrote:
> My personal view, built on the idea that the key issue is interoperability, is that we should just require CC-BY as the Gold Standard. Much simpler and much less risk of unexpected problems arising due to license incompatibilities downstream. It always bothers me that people *want* a bespoke license. What does this achieve? And what is the motivation?
>
> So I think working towards a very strong statement of best practice for research/science is valuable and it seems that there is some movement towards CC-BY/ccZero/BSD for content, data and code respectively (code is the least worked out and has the least agreement as yet) as a standard.
>
> Cheers
>
> Cameron
>
>>> Without wishing to re-open old wounds, the OpenDefinition isn't really appropriate in this context as it isn't strong enough as a definition for interoperability of bespoke licences. We're adopting the BOAI original definition alongside the recommendations of BOAI10 here that CC-BY is best practice (for journal *articles*...not really referring strongly to data here) ie share-alike is not "open enough" in this domain.
>>
>> Point very much taken Cameron. In which case - what about
>> "OpenDefinition compliant 'attribution style' licensing" which
>> shouldn't cause interoperability issues?
>>
>> Or perhaps it isn't worth broadening from CC-BY (as it might have been
>> a few years ago) as people are much more likely to use CC-BY than to
>> roll their own, which of course should be encouraged.
>>
>> J.
>>
>>> But feel free to comment!
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Cameron
>>>
>>>> J.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tom Olijhoek <tom.olijhoek at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A very important announcement I think
>>>>>>
>>>>>> judge for yourself
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.arl.org/sparc/media/HowOpenIsIt.shtml
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> YES. It's about time something like this happened - SPARC has been quiet and
>>>>> I look to them for some guidance. I haven't read the booklet, but comment on
>>>>> the abstract
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> • Move the conversation from “Is It Open Access?” to “How Open Is It?”
>>>>> • Clarify the definition of OA
>>>>> • Standardize terminology
>>>>> • Illustrate a continuum of “more open” versus “less open”
>>>>> • Enable people to compare and contrast publications and policies
>>>>> • Broaden the understanding of OA to a wider audience
>>>>>
>>>>> These are all critical. Until recently there was nowhere they could be
>>>>> discussed without the discussion being destroyed.
>>>>>
>>>>> But now we have OKF open-access !!
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's offer this organ to the world and let's finally try to get a decent
>>>>> discussion going.
>>>>>
>>>>> P.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TOM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> open-access mailing list
>>>>> open-access at lists.okfn.org
>>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jonathan Gray
>>>>
>>>> Head of Community
>>>> The Open Knowledge Foundation
>>>> http://www.okfn.org
>>>>
>>>> http://twitter.com/jwyg
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> open-access mailing list
>>>> open-access at lists.okfn.org
>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jonathan Gray
>>
>> Head of Community
>> The Open Knowledge Foundation
>> http://www.okfn.org
>>
>> http://twitter.com/jwyg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-science mailing list
>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-access mailing list
> open-access at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access