Heather,

Ever heard of FUD? This is it.

Jan Velterop


Sent from my iPad

On 17 Aug 2012, at 18:54, Heather Morrison <[email protected]> wrote:

> Many in the open access movement consider CC-BY to be the very embodiment of 
> the spirit of the Budapest Open Access Initiative - giving away all rights to 
> one's work, including commercial rights, for open access. My own take on this 
> is that while CC-BY can provide a useful tool for those fully engaged in the 
> open access spirit, the license is problematic for open access. This is 
> important now that funding agencies in the U.K. are beginning to require 
> CC-BY licenses when they fund open access article processing fees. That is to 
> say, we are now looking at a situation where organizations that do not have 
> any commitment to (or even liking for) open access, may be required to use 
> this license. 
> 
> Some questions that I think should be raised at this point:
> 
> The CC-BY legal code, as I read it, does not mention open access, nor is 
> there any wording to suggest that the license can only be applied to works 
> that are open access. Here is the URL for the legal code:
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
> 
> Questions:
> 
> 1.    Am I missing something in the legal code, i.e. does it say somewhere 
> that this license is only for open access works?
> 
> 2.    Is there any reason why a publisher could not use a CC-BY license on 
> toll-access works? (Here I am talking about an original publisher, not a 
> licensee).
> 
> 3.    Is there anything to stop a publisher that uses CC-BY from changing 
> their license at a later point in time? (Assuming the license is the 
> publisher's, not the author's).
> 
> 4.    Is there anything to stop a toll-access publisher from purchasing an 
> open access publisher that uses CC-BY, and subsequently selling all the 
> formerly open access journals under a toll-access model and dropping the open 
> access versions? The license would not permit a third party to do this, but 
> what I am asking about is if the original licensor sells to another publisher.
> 
> To sum up, my perspective is that CC-BY, while superficially appearing to be 
> the embodiment of BOAI, is actually a problematic license with significant 
> loopholes and serious thought should be given to this before it is 
> recommended as a standard for open access.
> 
> best,
> 
> Heather Morrison, MLIS
> Doctoral Candidate, Simon Fraser University School of Communication
> http://pages.cmns.sfu.ca/heather-morrison/
> The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics
> http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

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

Reply via email to