[open-science] SPARC author addendum uses CC-NC licence and now all hybrid publishers have followed

Mon Dec 12 03:12:01 UTC 2011

On 11-Dec-11, at 4:40 PM, Michael Nielsen wrote:

Personally, if the work is publicly funded then I think CC-BY or  
public domain is appropriate.  The reason is that a major motivator  
for public funding of long-term basic research is that the research  
can later be used by anyone as the basis of commercial products which  
benefit the broader public; the rising tide floats all boats argument  
for supporting public funding of basic research.  If researchers wish  
not to contribute to a broader commons, then I believe they should  
forfeit the public funding.

Two comments (capitals are just a formatting thing, I'm not angry!)

COPYRIGHT DOES NOT COVER IDEAS

It sounds to me like you are making a common mistake, assuming that  
copyright applies to ideas. Please correct me if I am wrong about  
this. If a research article is shared as open access under CC-NC, then  
anyone can read it and make use of the ideas contained in it without  
asking for permission. If you are thinking text / data mining, then CC- 
SA would work just fine.

PRIVATE GAIN AS BROADER COMMONS

It sounds to me like you are saying that  commercial products  
"benefits the broader public" and is a "broader commons". Is this what  
you meant to say? If so, I have some further questions for you...

best,

Heather Morrison