[open-science] [Open-access] CC-BY - correction

Wed Sep 4 22:04:21 UTC 2013

Wow, that is interesting. I am curious how I, as the author holding 
copyright over my article, could be bound by an outside agreement. I 
guess it might be like a non-disclosure agreement. I could write 
something down, which I reasonably hold copyright on and still be bound 
by a separate agreement stating I *can't* do certain things with my 
writing. Right? Am I interpreting this situation correctly?

Clearly, the choice of open access license is extremely important. 
Knowing what I know now, I would be extremely inclined to never use 
anything other than CC-BY.

-Luke

On 2013-09-04 4:25 PM, Fabiana Kubke wrote:
> Sent querie to a couple of copyright lawyers - Will respond when I get 
> their answers back. But yes, I think that in the end once one signs 
> that exclusive licence to Elsevier (something authors can do since 
> they own the copyright) then that is it. It is also  odd in thereuse 
> table 
> <http://www.elsevier.com/about/publishing-guidelines/policies/open-access-policies/oa-license-policy>that 
> only one of those "no" has an asterisk saying "excpet for the author"  
> which implies authors have none of the other rights that have a green 
> tick (despite being the owners of the copyright). So seems that 
> restrictions that are designed for third parties apply to authors - 
> which to me sounds like pure nonsense.
>
>
> Cheers
> Fabiana
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Couture Marc <marc.couture at teluq.ca 
> <mailto:marc.couture at teluq.ca>> wrote:
>
>     In my answer to Luke Winslow (see complet post below), I wrote:
>
>     >
>     > there could be a contradiction here, because the normal definition
>     > of an exclusive license is that no other license covering the same
>     > rights can be granted to another party
>     >
>
>     I checked the terms of Elsevier exclusive license, and it seems
>     there is in fact no such contradiction, because Elsevier is first
>     granted all the rights (by way of the exclusive license with the
>     author), and then is the one who applies the CC license (letting
>     the author decide which version).
>
>     Normally, it's the copyright owner who applies a CC license to a
>     work, but a licensee having been granted all the rights is the one
>     who is intitled to do it (and the author has lost any control in
>     this regard).
>
>     This again illustrates that copyright ownership may mean next to
>     nothing when a publisher asks for an exclusive license, instead of
>     copyright transfer.
>
>     Marc Couture
>
>     -----Message d'origine-----
>     De : open-science-bounces at lists.okfn.org
>     <mailto:open-science-bounces at lists.okfn.org>
>     [mailto:open-science-bounces at lists.okfn.org
>     <mailto:open-science-bounces at lists.okfn.org>] De la part de
>     Couture Marc
>     Envoyé : 4 septembre 2013 13:59
>     À : open-science at lists.okfn.org <mailto:open-science at lists.okfn.org>
>     Objet : Re: [open-science] [Open-access] CC-BY
>
>     Luke Winslow wrote:
>
>     >
>     > Can you really grant "exclusive license covering all publishing and
>     > distribution rights" to a third party on something released under
>     > creative commons?
>     >
>
>     Good question. I'd say that this license (between the author and
>     the publisher) applies in practice only to the rights the author
>     doesn't grant the users according to the CC-license chosen. So,
>     the right to authorize commercial uses, if the -NC condition is
>     used, and the right to make adaptations (derivative works), is the
>     -ND condition is used.
>
>     But I agree that there could be a contradiction here, because the
>     normal definition of an exclusive license is that no other license
>     covering the same rights can be granted to another party. But I'm
>     not able to go farther into the legal intricacies of such a case.
>
>     For a CC-BY license, however, all use rights are granted to all.
>     There is thus no need for a license between the author and the
>     publisher, as no permission need be asked to the right holder (or
>     the licensee) for any use. As far as I can tell (I checked just a
>     few) OA journals using CC-BY don't use author-publisher licenses.
>
>     Marc Couture
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     open-science mailing list
>     open-science at lists.okfn.org <mailto:open-science at lists.okfn.org>
>     http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>     Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     open-science mailing list
>     open-science at lists.okfn.org <mailto:open-science at lists.okfn.org>
>     http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>     Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> M Fabiana Kubke
> Chair Advisory Panel Creative Commons Aotearoa New Zealand 
> <http://www.creativecommons.org.nz/>
> Department of Anatomy | University of Auckland | New Zealand
> (+64) 9 373-7599 Ext 86002 | (+64)9 923 6002 (direct) | Mobile: (+64) 
> 210 437 121
>
> Skype: superfabs | http://twitter.com/Kubke | http://identi.ca/kubke | 
> http://buildingblogsofscience.wordpress.com | 
> http://sciblogs.co.nz/building-blogs-of-science | 
> http://popscinz.wordpress.com | http://talkingteaching.wordpress.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science

-- 
Limnology and Marine Science
University of Wisconsin - Madison

Mailing Address:
680 N. Park St.
Madison, WI 53706

Skype: lawinslow
Web: http://www.bookofluke.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20130904/206bc3c5/attachment-0001.html>