Sally Morris wrote :
Â
>Â
> Playing devil's advocate:Â aren't people (arguably) paying for the service
> provided in gathering together the articles in which they might be interested
> in an easily accessible/searchable form?
>Â
Â
This makes sense if someone pays for a subscription to a service, like those
provided by aggregators, which offers an overall added value. Such databases may
be viewed as compilations, which are in fact derivative works (see my previous
posts).
Â
The examples we discussed here used the pay-per-view model, which is different
in my opinion: they ask a fee for individual works freely available elsewhere.
Â
As to my statement that âputting a CC-BY Work behind a paywall is almost
certainly dishonestâ, well... I would hesitate to call the British Library
âdishonestâ.
Â
More an example of overview, which a public organization should since have
corrected (as P. Murray-Rust points out, it was 5 years ago). It shouldnât be
difficult to spot the (machine-readable) CC licenses (I donât know how hybrid
manage this on an article-by-article basis), or to put a link to the article and
suggest that the reader check for the possibility of open access.
Â
Anyway, these days, people should now know better than pull their credit card
before checking the title in Google Scholar.
Â
Marc Couture
[ Part 2: "Attached Text" ]
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
