Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. I understand that many open access advocates feel strongly about the CC-BY license. As a reminder, not just I but the vast majority of the open access journals and self-archiving authors do not use this license.
I particularly appreciate David Prosser's post which points out that having material in multiple repositories, both disciplinary and institutional, helps to protect OA against the possibility of re-enclosure downstream. I fully agree with this point - a healthy OA future, regardless of license, needs open access archives. Since others are pointing out their qualifications: I am a professional librarian with more than a decade's experience in negotiating licenses for electronic resources. I recently completed a PhD in the area of scholarly communication and open access, including work on mapping open access and CC licenses which I am continuing to work on. My interests in this discussion are the advancement of the knowledge of humankind, and meeting the needs of scholarship and scholars themselves. For some OA advocates of CC-BY by default, such as OA publishers using this license, they may have similar motives but should also acknowledge that they are advocating for their own business interests, too, whether they are for profit or not. best, 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
