[Open-access] [open-science] CC-BY

Tue Sep 3 20:41:52 UTC 2013

Hi,

An interesting opposite point of view can be found here:
Free Knowledge based on Creative Commons Licenses. Consequences, risks and
side-effects of the license module 'non-commercial use only – NC'
http://www.vlaamse-erfgoedbibliotheek.be/en/node/2725

Best

Ignasi

2013/9/3 Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk>

>  I have had in-depth discussions with both Heather Morrison and Rosie
> Redfield. I think they misinterpret what CC-BY allows and what CC-NC
> prevents. In science, at least, we have used CC-BY for 10 years with no
> problems. The only real effect , in science, for CC-NC - is that it allows
> the publisher (not the author) to make additional money from reselling
> rights to the article. Thus a CC-NC for an Elsevier article does not forbid
> commercial re-use- it simply means that re-users have to pay Elsevier an
> additional and lucrative tax. CC-NC in science is about ibcreasing
> publisher income, not about restricting re-use.
>
>  In A+H the current ethos is that authors sell their books.  CC-NC may
> have a bearing on this, though it will depend on the exact details of
> copyright and the publisher. In general CC-NC controls who can make money.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Klaus Graf <klausgraf at googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>>   I cannot see the NSA context of CC-BY, sorry.
>>
>>  There was no copyright in the middle ages and a lot of fruitful
>> plagiarism. May I remember to my thoughts at
>>
>> http://jlsc-pub.org/jlsc/vol1/iss1/5/
>>
>>  CC-BY-ND blocks translations and other derivative works.
>>
>>  CC-BY-NC blocks scholarly use in commercial context e.g. use in the most
>> (commercial) e-journals.
>>
>>  Klaus Graf
>>
>>
>> 2013/9/3 Heather Morrison <Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca>
>>
>>> This argument appears to reflect a position of technological determinism
>>> which I reject - the idea that we are helpless to do anything but adapt to
>>> advancing technology. The key problem with this argument is that it is we
>>> humans that create the technology, and we have the ability to shape it.
>>>
>>> Another example of this kind of argument that people are thankfully
>>> beginning to question, is the idea that now that we have the internet it is
>>> ridiculous to think that there is any notion of privacy and the
>>> accompanying idea that society both can and does accept this.
>>>
>>> Snowden's revelations of NSA surveillance are such a good illustration
>>> of the dangers of this loss of privacy that people are beginning to take
>>> notice and say that yes, we do want privacy in the online environment.
>>> Humans are not helpless with respect to this technology; we created it, and
>>> we can shape it future.
>>>
>>> This perspective is essential to the work of advocates for open access,
>>> open science, a free and open internet. We work for this (I think) because
>>> we perceive this as a desirable potential of the internet, and we do not
>>> believe that this potential will be achieved by sitting back and watching
>>> the technology unfold, but rather because we think action is both necessary
>>> and desirable.
>>>
>>> If you're interested in the social shaping of technology, you might want
>>> to read some of Andrew Feenberg, e.g. Questioning Technology or
>>> Transforming Technology.
>>>
>>> ~ my two bits ~ thoughts?
>>>
>>> Heather Morrison
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2013-09-03, at 10:48 AM, Luke Winslow wrote:
>>>
>>> > This kind of thing has been happening for a while. It is a natural
>>> consequence of open licenses. Wikipedia has been re-packaged and sold many
>>> times. While I can't find an example, popular open source software has
>>> fallen prey from time to time, being repackaged and sold to uninformed
>>> consumers who don't realize there are cost-free versions available.
>>> >
>>> > I would argue this new world requires more of the consumer. Be savvy.
>>> Do a little google research. There's no going back to simpler times, the
>>> complexity is here to stay.
>>> >
>>> > -Luke
>>> >
>>> > On 2013-09-03 9:08 AM, Klaus Graf wrote:
>>> >>
>>> http://blogs.ubc.ca/chendricks/2013/08/31/troubling-open-access-cc-by/
>>> >>
>>> >> Thoughts?
>>> >>
>>> >> Klaus Graf
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> open-science mailing list
>>> >>
>>> >> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>>> >> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>>> >>
>>> >> Unsubscribe:
>>> >> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Limnology and Marine Science
>>> > University of Wisconsin - Madison
>>> >
>>> > Mailing Address:
>>> > 680 N. Park St.
>>> > Madison, WI 53706
>>> >
>>> > Skype: lawinslow
>>> > Web: http://www.bookofluke.org
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > open-science mailing list
>>> > open-science at lists.okfn.org
>>> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>>> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>>>
>>> --
>>>   Dr. Heather Morrison
>>> Assistant Professor
>>> École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies
>>> University of Ottawa
>>>
>>> http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html
>>> Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca
>>>
>>> ALA Accreditation site visit scheduled for 30 Sept-1 Oct 2013 /
>>> Visite du comité externe pour l'accréditation par l'ALA est prévu le 30
>>> sept-1 oct 2013
>>>
>>> http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/accreditation.html
>>> http://www.esi.uottawa.ca/accreditation.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-access mailing list
>> open-access at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
>
> Aquest correu electrònic i els annexos poden contenir informació
> confidencial o protegida legalment i està adreçat exclusivament a la
> persona o entitat destinatària. Si no sou el destinatari final o la persona
> encarregada de rebre’l, no esteu autoritzat a llegir-lo, retenir-lo,
> modificar-lo, distribuir-lo, copiar-lo ni a revelar-ne el contingut. Si heu
> rebut aquest correu electrònic per error, us preguem que n’informeu al
> remitent i que elimineu del sistema el missatge i el material annex que
> pugui contenir. Gràcies per la vostra col·laboració.
>
> Este correo electrónico y sus anexos pueden contener información
> confidencial o legalmente protegida y está exclusivamente dirigido a la
> persona o entidad destinataria. Si usted no es el destinatario final o la
> persona encargada de recibirlo, no está autorizado a leerlo, retenerlo,
> modificarlo, distribuirlo, copiarlo ni a revelar su contenido. Si ha
> recibido este mensaje electrónico por error, le rogamos que informe al
> remitente y elimine del sistema el mensaje y el material anexo que pueda
> contener. Gracias por su colaboración.
>
> This email message and any documents attached to it may contain
> confidential or legally protected material and are intended solely for the
> use of the individual or organization to whom they are addressed. We remind
> you that if you are not the intended recipient of this email message or the
> person responsible for processing it, then you are not authorized to read,
> save, modify, send, copy or disclose any of its contents. If you have
> received this email message by mistake, we kindly ask you to inform the
> sender of this and to eliminate both the message and any attachments it
> carries from your account. Thank you for your collaboration.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-access/attachments/20130903/e07da14e/attachment.html>