The topic appears to be related to legal issues around the music industry. "ELI promotes discussion and debate on the most compelling legal issues facing the music industry today. "
the full application can be found here: http://www.grammy.com/PDFs/GRAMMY_Foundation/ELIRules08.pdf I am willing to support action. I would suggest that they change the language to reflect the Open Access legal publishing norms. Possibly use one of the licensing agreements for a law review that has adopted the Science Commons Open Access Law Principles. Here is a list of the principles.: THEREFORE, WE ADOPT the following four principles as part of our publication policy: 1. The Journal will require from the Author no more than a reasonable, limited-term exclusive license for commercial publication. The Journal will not interfere at any time with the author's freedom to make his or her work available under a license as free as the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/> . 2. In the event of reprinting or republication (of any part) of the Article the Author will always attribute first publication to the Journal, unless the Journal does not require this. 3. Upon publication of the Article, the Journal will make available to the Author an electronic version of the edited Article—such as the PDF or the word processing document of the published Article—with the expectation that this will be posted in an Open Access Repository.<http://archives.eprints.org/> 4. In the event that the Journal does not use the Science Commons Open Access Law Model Publication Agreement, it will post a current copy of its publication agreement on its web site, and will ensure that its agreement complies with these four principles. -Brian On 9/20/07, Elizabeth Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Really? Do you know what their topic was? > > I've seen this in the past but always dismissed it in that I didn't > think any FC-type work would really be eligible.. > > On 9/20/07, Fred Benenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yah, and if they refuse, we could shame them and call them out on it. > > > > Coincidentally, I know someone who actually won this award, but I'm not > sure > > that makes much of a difference. > > > > > > F > > > > > > > > On 9/20/07, Dana Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ask if they'd settle for a non-exclusive license? > > > > > > > What action should we take? > > > > > > > > Denver > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Discuss mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- Brian Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] (206) 335-8577 (Cell) Access To Justice Technology Principles www.ATJWeb.org Freedom for IP www.FreedomforIP.org
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
