[open-science] url suggestion for a CCZero-how-to/ copyleft Re: bad to better :-) Re: some jump Re: Should scientific text be put in the public domain rather than licensed with CC-BY?

Sat Jan 15 18:14:20 UTC 2011

... more ideas for possible solutions inline

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 17:11:10 +0100, koltzenburg wrote
>   
> fine with me, Marius, and thank you very much for this opportunity, let us do some e-learning together :-)
> some jump, me included
> 
> so this sounds like a good idea to me:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> > 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.
> 
> any idea for funding such an effort and whom to pay?

this might be a social network option (proprietary) http://www.quora.com/CCZerothanks to Egon Willighagen who added this topic 

> > 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 waiver:
> > 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.
> 
> here you might be able to help yet again: where exactly did you find the recommendation you quote above?

while I am still interested in your answer, Marius, especially for the third part which I have not seem used so farit occurred to me that, in a journal and given our general article layout, we'd still need a place on an article's web page that signals "here you can read something about copyright"and that it would probably be easiest to find if there was an icon as expectedwhat is your take, everyone, wouldn't it make sense to replace the c by the inverted c of copyleft - a change that will be barely noticed, maybe, but yet do the trick ;-)so we could write:

 The Author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this article - to the extent possible under law. [plus maybe the third sentence the significance of which I have not yet understood for our journal context]

has anyone seen the copyleft symbol in unicode yet?(the one above I found here http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?40131-Copyleft-Symbol-in-Unicode - but is too conspicuous, maybe, for my purposes) btw, in LaTeX see: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=466051next lesson, please :-)cheers,Claudia

> > 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!
> 
> feels like it is amazing, yes,
> 
> looking forward to you next lesson, Marius :-)
> 
> ... and of course we might take my jumps as step-by-step (from bad to better) examples elsewhere, too :-)
> 
> cheers,
> Claudia
> 
> > 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 publishing science.
> > >
> > > ... so this already a good start - of education for all, I mean ;-)
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > Claudia
> > >
> > >
> > > > 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, http://www.ctt-journal.com/2-6-en-gratwohl-2011jan14.html
> > >> >
> > >> > 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
> > >> > ~~~

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20110115/947bda79/attachment-0001.html>