[open-science] some jump Re: Should scientific text be put in the public domain rather than licensed with CC-BY?
m.kempe at qmul.ac.uk
Fri Jan 14 15:33:47 UTC 2011
I think this is a great example of the sort of information that the
community should agree upon - with the aid of legal specialists - and make
centrally available on a website. I know that the CC website has an
excellent guide to using their tools, including CC0, but I think at the
moment scientists will need a lot of hand-holding to use it - and rightly
so, nobody gets into science with the expectation of having to thinking hard
about the legal status of their work! A centralised guide for would-be open
scientists could prevent situations like this from happening in the future,
and easy life for everybody.
Consider the details of this particular situation: the CTT website has been
changed to read:
"© The Author. This article is provided under the following license as a
Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication"
CC recommends the following formula, which avoids some of the problems we
have right now:
"To the extent possible under law, ___ has waived all copyright and related
or neighboring rights to ___. This work is published from: ___."
see http://creativecommons.org/choose/zero/ for more details.
It seems to me that if even people who read this mailing list and fully
believe in open science are getting the legal issues around using the public
domain wrong, we shouldn't be surprised that "normal" scientists aren't
using the public domain! Hence, I maintain, the need for a user-friendly,
one-stop-shop website for opening your science.
Lastly, I hope it's clear that I fully applaud your efforts on this,
Claudia, and I don't mean to criticize what you're doing - on the contrary,
I think it's amazing news!
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:15 PM, <koltzenburg at w4w.net> wrote:
> Hi Marius,
> > The work can be copyrighted by the author or public domain, but not
both. Also, CC0 is only partly a license; first and foremost it's a waiver,
and it only uses licensing as a fall-back option.
> > In general, these sorts of issues are the sorts of things people need to
be educated about if the public domain is to become a normal venue for
> ... so this already a good start - of education for all, I mean ;-)
> > On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 11:33 AM, <koltzenburg at w4w.net> wrote:
>> > hi Peter, hi all,
>> > > The major problem is author apathy. Most hand their rights over
without thinking. They jump through absurd hoops to publish in the chosen
brand. This is an additonal requirement that they will not understand and
will not try to understand.
>> > well, l tried my best and here we go:
>> > CTT's first article in the Public Domain published today:
>> > Gratwohl A.: Theoretical and practical issues of autologous versus
allogeneic stem cell transplantation in multiple sclerosis,
>> > hooray,
>> > CK
>> > this time in my role as:
>> > ~~~
>> > C. Koltzenburg, Managing editor
>> > Cellular Therapy and Transplantation, http://www.ctt-journal.com
>> > University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
>> > Mobile: +4917649826236
>> > <managingeditor at ctt-journal.com>
>> > http://www.koltzenburg.net/aiki/CalenDar
>> > ~~~
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > open-science mailing list
>> > open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> thanks & cheers,
> Best regards,
> Claudia Koltzenburg
> C. Koltzenburg, Managing editor
> Cellular Therapy and Transplantation, http://www.ctt-journal.com
> University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
> Mobile: +4917649826236
> <managingeditor at ctt-journal.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the open-science