[open-science] [okfn-discuss] "Open Access" publications under CC-NC licences

Thu Dec 8 01:29:09 UTC 2011

Hi All

PMR suggested generating a resource pack for publishers and funders on the
use of the NC clause. We can couple this with Is It Open Data? requests
which will converge nicely with the need for clarification of publisher
positions with regard to text and data mining in response to the Hargreaves
Report.

I've set up an Etherpad and started populating it with a great set of
policy statements found by Ross Mounce alongside publications referenced in
the discussions on PMR's blog and associated posts. Please add anything you
feel is relevant!
http://okfnpad.org/sciencewg-nc-licensing

Additionally, I'll be around on Skype (jcmcoppice12) on Sunday afternoon if
anybody would like to join in making IIOD? requests. Let me know if you
would potentially be available and we can arrange times to suit.

Jenny

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:56 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:

> There has been considerable recent discussion about CC-NC licences being
> used for "Open Access" papers by scholarly publishers. I have written a few
> blog posts (
>
>
> http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2011/11/29/scientists-should-never-use-cc-nc-this-explains-why/
>
> http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2011/12/04/more-on-how-commercial-publishers-use-non-commercial-licensing-funders-are-you-really-getting-your-money%E2%80%99s-worth-many-are-not/
> ,
> http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2011/12/06/acceptance-of-cc-nc-has-sold-readers-and-authors-seriously-short/
> ) and responded to comments. I have summarised this in
>
> http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2011/12/07/%E2%80%9Copen-access%E2%80%9D-and-non-commercial-licences-summary/
>
> Ross Mounce has summarised this as:
> *this mess has caused irreparable damage to the re-usability of the
> literature
> with which I completely agree. I think it's so serious that it should not
> be discussed on my blog but brought here.
>
> It took me by surprise that authorPays "Open Access" seems to be almost
> completely CC-NC. (The main open Access publishers such as PLoSONE and BMC
> have complete OKD-compliance by using CC-BY). CC-NC places so many
> restrictions on re-use that it is almost useless in science.
>
> I believe that the OKFN should take this issue very seriously and with
> great urgency. We know that multi-author organizations which start using
> CC-NC find it impossible to chnage later without approaching every author
> and with scholpub this is out of the question, so the longer this goes on
> the worse the problem.
>
> I believe that OKFN should put together a group which draws together
> resource material which makes the case against NC and then promotoes this
> case to publishers and funders. Any aproaches to funders or publishers
> could be done through IsItOpenData.
>
>
>
> *
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20111208/2535cd74/attachment.html>