[Open-access] [open-science] Open Science Anthology published

[Jan Velterop]

Dear Heather, I'm not calling you names (unless I totally misunderstand what that expression means in English). What I mean by 'voice in the wilderness' is your nigh biblical passion for a lone position in this discussion.

Best,

Jan

On 28 Jan 2014, at 17:57, Heather Morrison <Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca> wrote:

> It would be helpful to the discussion to focus on the substantive points. Calling people who disagree with you names does not prove your point.
> 
> best,
> 
> Heather Morrison
> 
> 
> On 2014-01-28, at 12:37 PM, Jan Velterop <velterop at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> I'm perfectly happy for Heather to enjoy her assumed role of being a voice in the wilderness. She's entitled to it.
>> 
>> Jan
>> 
>> On 28 Jan 2014, at 17:15, Mike Taylor <mike at indexdata.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> All right, folks. I do believe we've crossed over into troll-feeding now.
>>> 
>>> I for one will now try to resist SIWOTI syndrome on this thread. Let's
>>> just agree to let Heather have the last word, then it can all be over.
>>> 
>>> -- Mike.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 28 January 2014 17:08, Mr. Puneet Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 28, 2014, at 9:01 AM, Heather Morrison <Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I guess my summary was premature...(sigh)
>>>> 
>>>> On 2014-01-28, at 11:11 AM, "Mr. Puneet Kishor" <punk.kish at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 28, 2014, at 7:59 AM, Klaus Graf <klausgraf at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 1.      The resemblance between CC-BY and the BOAI definition is
>>>>> superficial in nature. It is particularly important for open access
>>>>> advocates to be aware that CC licenses, including CC-BY, do not mean that
>>>>> works must be made available free of charge. CC-BY policy has a huge,
>>>>> potentially systemic loophole: the possibility of re-enclosure. What is
>>>>> given freely today with a CC-BY license could easily be available solely
>>>>> through sale from Elsevier or services like RightsLink down the road.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> No evidence for this. Nearly all CC-BY works are available free of cost. CC
>>>> could clarify that re-enclosure in the digital context isn't allowed.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Indeed. The license very clearly states that you, the licensee, "may not
>>>> apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others
>>>> from doing anything the license permits."
>>>> (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en_US)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Two comments:
>>>> 
>>>> CC would have to have the agreement of the Creative Commons community to
>>>> change the licenses to prevent re-enclosure. From time to time I participate
>>>> in the CC community list and have raised the question about CC and free of
>>>> charge. The short answer is that there are many people in the Creative
>>>> Commons community for whom freedom means freedom to put up a paywall and
>>>> charge for works. Consider the difference between open source software,
>>>> where the code is free for anyone to manipulate, but software creators are
>>>> free to charge for the software, and open access with its "free of charge".
>>>> Klaus, I very much encourage you to sign up for the CC community discussion
>>>> and check in with them about this question:
>>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
>>>> 
>>>> The licensee "may not apply legal terms or technological measures..." refers
>>>> to applying legal terms or adding TPMs to the work per se. There is nothing
>>>> to stop a downstream user from putting up a paywall before you get to the
>>>> work. Indeed, it would not be possible to do this, as most of us need to go
>>>> through a paywall to connect to the internet (whether we or someone else is
>>>> paying).  We are already seeing that people are using articles to compile
>>>> books for sale - people have to pay to get the book.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Perhaps it was another case of premature summary, but you completely missed
>>>> the subsequent para in my email where I wrote, "Unless all copies of the
>>>> work vanish from the face of the earth except for the ones remaining in the
>>>> vault of an evil publisher who then decides to charge for access to the
>>>> vault, what Heather states above is not possible. And, even in the unlikely
>>>> scenario I describe, once someone pays for access to the vault and then
>>>> downloads the work, that work is once again free like the original."
>>>> 
>>>> Indeed, if I download your CC BY work, I have all the right in the world (no
>>>> matter how misplaced one may think it is) to charge for that work. On the
>>>> other hand, others have all the right in the world to ignore my offering and
>>>> get your work directly from you or from other sources completely free if it
>>>> is still available. The only reason a sane person would pay me for an
>>>> otherwise freely available work is if I add something of value to that work.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Puneet.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> open-access mailing list
>>>> open-access at lists.okfn.org
>>>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> open-access mailing list
>>> open-access at lists.okfn.org
>>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access
>> 
>