Forwarding a BOAI posting (with which I would fully agree!). -- Stevan Harnad


Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Andras Holl" <[email protected]>
> Date: January 21, 2012 10:08:49 AM EST
> To: [email protected]
>
> Hi,
>
> This is a delayed comment on a posting by Stevan Harnad, dated 18th december,
2011. I was glad to read that gratis OA is not second class OA after all.
>
> Andras Holl
>
> Is libre OA and CC appropriate for scientific literature?
> The goal of this essay is not to question the usefulness of OA - OA is not
only good for science and society, but necessary. I argue in favor of the gratis
OA model, or a readjustment of the conditions of OA, for creating a copyright
model more suitable for scientific articles than CC, and for the creation of a
protocol which is capable of transmitting harvesting semantics, access and
re-use rights in a way understandable of machine agents.
>
> Gratis vs. libre OA
> I find libre OA unnecessary. While OA (gratis OA) is indispensable, I do not
see real demand for libre OA. I can cook up cases when libre OA would be
advantageous - and I can give a few examples when it proved to be harmful. But
the main point is that libre OA is not necessary - while OA is.
>
> Who has the rights to reposit?
> To achieve OA, the green road is open for everyone. While I do not see much
reason to deposit articles appeared in OA journals to repositories, I do not
object to that. Non-OA articles should be made OA with depositing them to
repositories. But who can do this? Obviously those who have rights over the
article. The author(s), their employers, and the organizations involved in
funding the research. In my view, no other parties are entitled to re-distribute
the article. In other words, the whole journal, or whole volumes would not be
redistributable normally, but each article individually would (by the parties
listed above).
>
> Copyright models
> There are several copyright formulas, each designed for a certain kind of
documents. GNU or BSD is for software, CC is for artwork. I do not think that
these are appropriate for scientific journal articles. I can understand why is
there a demand for re-using software code or executable programs, or a nice
illustration. As a scientist, I think that "fair use" and OA conditions proposed
above (gratis OA, no redistribution for others than who could claim rights over
the article) are enough for science. Or maybe we should specify something better
tailored to scientific journal articles.
>
> Article components
> While I do not see any demand for whole articles to be freely redistributable
and reusable or remixable - only for getting them accessible freely,  I do see
much demand for some building blocks of the same articles. There is much demand
for re-using figures. Scientists often want to reproduce figures from published
articles, unchanged or modified, plotting new measurements, removing
questionable data points. There is also a great demand for re-using research
data. One scientist might want to plot the data from the literature together
with his/her own, or there are compilation databases which collect data from the
literature. The demand for mashups might not be large as yet, but I think it
will grow. In these cases redistribution and re-use rights are of great
importance. Here I think CC by-nc could be used. Another redistributable
component - something even desirable to get redistributed - is the meta-data,
including the abstract.
>
> Resources for communicating the semantics, hints for harvesters and
machine-readable rights
> While it is necessary for scientists to get access promptly to an article they
need - something what is provided by gratis OA, mass harvesting of journal
content is not usually done manually. I can not imagine a situation where it
would become suddenly important, from one moment to an other to mirror a whole
journal. I feel that such situations could be handled without providing libre OA
rights to everyone. On the other hand, some parts of the articles - the
abstract, the figures, the data - should be made available with well defined
conditions, in advance. But the demand for these article components might come
not only for individual scientists reading the article, but by robotic agents.
> I feel that we would need a mechanism - maybe a modification or combination of
existing ones - to enable crawlers, harvesters to fetch what is the best for
them and for the journal or repository, and to communicate the rights for
automatic creation of mashups. Existing technologies like OAI-ORE, robots.txt
and .htaccess already have much (or maybe all) what needed. I illustrate my idea
with an example. OAI-ORE could describe the semantic relationships between the
files on the journal website (OA journal) or in the repository. This is an
article and that is the first figure of it, and that is the first table. All
items could be present in multiple formats: the same article could be available
in HTML and PDF. While it is obvious that PDF is for printing, HTML is for
on-line viewing, the additional information that the HTML offers enhanced
features could be communicated too. One might want to give the hint to a
harvester or indexer - a machine - that for text indexing the recommended format
is the LaTeX source. This information might be present article-by-article, but
it would be even better to inform the harvesters or indexers about the structure
of the website: where to find material to index, and which file is equivalent
text-wise to what, based on file-names or directories. The copyright information
should be also communicated with the robots (with the human reader too, maybe by
other means). The crawler should be able to understand that which information
could be re-used in mashups, for instance.
>
> Andras Holl
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> Andras Holl / Holl Andras                 e-mail: [email protected]
> Konkoly Observatory / MTA CsKI           Tel.: +36 1 3919368 Fax: +36 1
2754668
> IT manager / Szamitastechn. rendszervez. Mail: H1525 POBox 67, Budapest,
Hungary
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-






    [ Part 2: "Attached Text" ]

_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Reply via email to