[Open-access] [open-science] Open Science Anthology published
velterop at gmail.com
Fri Jan 24 12:46:11 UTC 2014
CC-BY allows for commercial use, so that includes IMO also sales by RightsLink. Elsevier – or any other publisher – needs no special arrangement with the authors. Neither Elsevier nor RightsLink is in contravention of CC-BY as long as acknowledgement is given and the CC-BY terms indicated. (Elsevier will do that, presumably; not sure about RightsLink).
On 24 Jan 2014, at 12:24, Mike Taylor <mike at indexdata.com> wrote:
> On 24 January 2014 12:19, Pierre-Carl Langlais
> <pierrecarl.langlais at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hmm… This specification of CC-BY seems to create some kind of viral
>> mechanism : « No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or
>> technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the
>> license permits. » Not adding any restrictions beyond what the license
>> permits = cannot republish under stricter terms (which certainly includes
> Ha! You are quite right.
> So does that mean that Elsevier is actually in contravention of the CC
> By licence when they offer copies of CC By papers for a fee via
> RightsLink? Probably not, given that they have (in nearly all cases)
> coerced the author into signing copyright over to them. Under those
> circumstances, of course, Elsevier (being the copyright holder) is at
> liberty to distribute copies under other terms as well as CC By. But
> if they obtained the paper by downloading a copy from elsewhere under
> CC By, they would be in breach by doing so.
> So my understanding of the distinction between CC By and CC By-SA is
> now that the former is viral only with respect to COPIES of the
> document so licenced, whereas the latter is also viral with respect to
> derivative works.
> -- Mike.
> open-access mailing list
> open-access at lists.okfn.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access
More information about the open-access