[open-science] [Open-access] Open Science Anthology published

Jenny Molloy jenny.molloy at okfn.org
Tue Jan 28 18:39:06 UTC 2014

Hi All

I think this particular thread has run its course so I would request that
any focused follow on discussion is started on another thread.
Thanks for posing these questions Heather and feel free to begin another
thread if you feel the list can work towards answering some of them.


On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:23 PM, Heather Morrison <
Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca> wrote:

>   On 2014-01-28, at 12:54 PM, "Mr. Puneet Kishor" <punk.kish at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>  I disagree with Heather's stance and conclusion, but I do very much
> appreciate her belief in Open as a preferred state of being. I will err to
> assume our disagreement is based not on dogma but on a misunderstanding of
> how licenses work and their role as both a legal instrument as well as a
> sociocultural signal for behavior. From that assumption stems my belief
> that if I (we) can get our message across constructively and patiently, we
> will only be doing good service to the cause of open scholarship.
> I speak all of the above (and below) for myself, but undoubtedly I am
> influenced by and influence the organizations I may be associated or
> employed with.
>  Comment:
>  Thank you, Mr. Puneet Kishor. I would agree that some of the discussion
> has to do with how the license actually work, and echo that I appreciate
> the work of my colleagues in the open access movement even when we don't
> agree on  a particular issue.
>  From my perspective there are other considerations besides how the
> licenses work per se. For example,
>  1. What is it that people want the license to accomplish? and the
> related question - is licensing the most effective approach to achieve the
> desired goal?
>  2. Are the needs, benefits and risks of different licenses the same for
> every type of scholarly work? Do we fully understand the needs, benefits
> and risks of different licenses?
>  3. If we are experimenting with new types of uses of works (allowing
> downstream commercial use and derivatives, for example), who might want to
> make use of these new rights, and for what purpose?
>  4. Let's separate the question of whether a particular license is best
> for scholarship from the question of whether there is a compelling case to
> require a particular license through policy.
>  best,
>  Heather Morrison
> _______________________________________________
> open-access mailing list
> open-access at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20140128/d87e15aa/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the open-science mailing list