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

Mr. Puneet Kishor punkish at eidesis.org
Tue Dec 13 16:02:14 UTC 2011

On Dec 13, 2011, at 4:29 AM, Paola Di Maio wrote:

> Puneet
> Not sure what you see wrong in the combined solution below, and why you
> call it mixing apples and oranges

I have a bottle of jam on my table that says on the label, "To be eaten only by nice people." Everyday I look at it but can't bring myself to opening it.

> We are dealing with a complex and heterogenous issue,
> Mixing different approaches and tackling problems from different angles at
> a multidimensional level is necessary to address complexity
> Systemic solutions are by definition, mixed approaches, and
> by far the *only* valid method of addressing complexity

It *is* a complex and heterogeneous issue, but it is not going to be solved by bunging in unrelated things.

I would venture that the reason CC became so popular is because it offers simplicity. By *not* covering every possible edge case, it is useful for *most* of the folks around the world. 

Complicated sods like us on this mailing list will always argue back and forth of the merits and demerits of various ifs-and-whats of different licenses till the cows come home, but most of the world will move on.

As I said earlier... a license can't solve the world's problems, especially problems that are inherently subjective. 

Who decides what is a socially responsible company or an individual? Most of the time I can't decide if I myself am socially responsible. 

Who decides which companies lobby for "more restrictive copyright laws"? What is "more"? What is "restrictive"?

"Education should not be commercial"! excuse me while I clear my throat. Education is always commercial, and should be commercial... people need to be paid salaries, labs need to be fitted with equipment, campuses need to be maintained. It can't subsist on love and fresh air.

"Free and unrestricted use, with respect"? "With respect"! How do I even begin to unravel this ball of hurt?

I love what CC has done, and, what I believe, will be doing -- make licenses that are clear, easy to understand, implement, and communicate, and that cover *most* but definitely not *all* of the use-cases and kinds of information. If CC starts getting entangled in moralistic issues, that will be the end of that good-intentioned venture.

The only thing remaining then is for the rest of us to argue about which of those licenses, if any, are suitable for whatever information we are considering.

Personally, I really don't give a rat's ass about who uses my information. I love doing science, I don't want to get bogged down by licenses. Besides, thankfully, I do get a salary for doing science. 

I know for certain that I will make more money pulling shots of espresso at the local coffee shop than by trying to extract commercial value from what I create. I will continue to focus on getting my salary as I have more chance of extracting commercial value out of my knowledge and skills that make me useful to scientific ventures than from the products of my knowledge and skills.

My choice of license for my works is no license at all. Which is why I prefer CC0. Put it on, then forget about it... move on to the next problem.

कर्मण्ये वाधिकारस्ते मा फलेषु कदाचना
कर्मफलेह्तुर भुरमा ते संगोस्त्वकर्मानी॥

> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Puneet Kishor <punkish at eidesis.org> wrote:
>> On Dec 12, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Heather Morrison wrote:
>>> Commercial use for the 99%
>>> Commercial use for socially responsible companies and individual
>> entrepreneurs
>>> Commercial use EXCEPT companies that lobby for more restrictive
>> copyright laws
>>> Free use for students and teachers (this should not be called commercial
>> use, because education should not be commercial - the fact that we are
>> heading in this direction does not make it a good direction)
>>> Free and unrestricted use, with respect. If you wish to use data about
>> an endangered species to protect the species, go for it. On the other hand,
>> if you wish to use the data to harm the species, we should be able to sue.
>> Not just the author, either - anyone.
>> There is so much wrong with the above that I don't even know where to
>> start. It is mixing apples, oranges, and persimmons (for the lack of a
>> better metaphor).
>> --
>> Puneet Kishor http://punkish.org
>> science http://earth-base.org
>> advocacy http://creativecommons.org

More information about the open-science mailing list