No subject

Sun Dec 12 18:29:16 UTC 2010

what he makes of it all ;-)

Best

A

> If they won't do this, then you should give very serious consideration
> to pulling your article and submitting it elsewhere. However much they
> call this issue "open archaeology", if it snaps shut in six months
> then it's not open, and by giving them your work on those terms you
> would be lending credibility to their abuse of "open". I do appreciate
> that withdrawing and resubmitting is a royal pain; but in the long run
> it's probably the best thing for your paper: it will get read and
> cited more.
>
> -- Mike.
>
>
> On 6 June 2012 14:40,  <anthony at beckhome.info> wrote:
>> Not my call, but I can ask the theme editor.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> A
>>
>>> Can you shame them at least into doing the opposite? NON-open for six
>>> months, then release under CC BY after that embargo elapses?
>>>
>>> -- Mike.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6 June 2012 14:15,  <anthony at beckhome.info> wrote:
>>>> The irony of this situation is not lost on any of us. Amazingly T&F
>>>> can
>>>> not be shamed into doing the 'right thing'. However, in this instance
>>>> the
>>>> need for the message for the community is as important as the
>>>> principles......
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> A
>>>>
>>>>> On 6 June 2012 14:07,  <anthony at beckhome.info> wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks Mike and Ross,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately Taylor and Francis are not going to go for any form of
>>>>>> CC
>>>>>> licence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The texts in this issues will be made available for 6 months and
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> revert to T&Fs normal terms and conditions. What I want to do is to
>>>>>> allow
>>>>>> text mining of the papers for at least that 6 month period and
>>>>>> potentially
>>>>>> in perpetuity. Hence, I want/need some clause that specifically
>>>>>> allows
>>>>>> text mining.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is not any part of an "open archaeology" theme.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want an "open for text-mining for six months, then paywalled"
>>>>> licence, you'll have to write one yourself, for the very good reason
>>>>> that no-one else has done anything that silly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry if that reply is unhelpful, but it's the truth. Criticism aimed
>>>>> not at you, of course, but at T&F.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Mike.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> open-science mailing list
>>>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-science mailing list
>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>>
>