I am available for input and comment. Peter and I serve on the Advisory Board of ukPMC, which is backed by 18 funders (14 UK and 4 EU, I think). I might be a good idea to work with these funders first to see if they will all publicly endorse CC-BY as the new standard: http://ukpmc.ac.uk/Funders/
Another important target is eLife, the new journal by HHMI, Wellcome and MPS: http://www.hhmi.org/news/elife20111107.html Not the journal should be targeted, but the funders. They can make CC-BY the new gold standard. Chris ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Murray-Rust [[email protected]] Sent: 08 December 2011 09:48 To: Open Knowledge Foundation discussion list Subject: Re: [okfn-discuss] "Open Access" publications under CC-NC licences On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Armbruster, Chris <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: One possibility is to look at publishers - and their business model / licensing. Yet, paid open access (open access publishing - OAP) very much relies on funders and institutions paying article processing charges (APC). Hence, the funders should be the ones that make CC-BY a condition of paying APC. Principally, they should have an intrinsic interest to do so, because CC-BY is the right license for science as well as the knowledge economy. Many thanks Chris. It'svery useful to have such a clear statement What we would need is a list of funders/institutions with OA policies - and a clarification whether they require CC-BY or not. There is something like the SPARC Europe Seal for Journals http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=loadTempl&templ=080423 - as a model for a seal/list. Again, the seal is applied to journals instead of funders. I think this a strategic mistake. The journals will follow the funders, if the APC are linked to CC-BY. I think this list is really important. I think the OKFN can muster enough people to do a rapid summary (probably 90% of the publishing volume, omitting long tail). Just now, I have not got the time to help with this, but I can point to some work on OA policy implementation that I completed. Maybe this can help someone to get started: Absolutely. I think what we need is a simple table with the key headings and we could do this very quickly on this list and with a Googledoc. I hope you would have time to comment. Armbruster, Chris, Implementing Open Access: Policy Case Studies (October 14, 2010). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1685855 Armbruster, Chris, Open Access Policy Implementation: First Results Compared (September 15, 2011). Learned Publishing, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1927775 Armbruster, Chris, Implementing Open Access Policy: First Case Studies (September 15, 2011). Chinese Journal of Library and Information Science, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp.1-22, 2010. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1927772 Armbruster, Chris, Cyberscience and the Knowledge-Based Economy, Open Access and Trade Publishing: From Contradiction to Compatibility with Nonexclusive Copyright Licensing. International Journal of Communications Law and Policy, No. 12, 2008; Policy Futures in Education, Vol. 6, No. 4, 2008. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=938119 Obviously we must compile a list of articles such as yours and also any key blog posts so if you have a wider bibliography this would be very useful. Best wishes, Chris ________________________________________ From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Pieter Colpaert [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: 08 December 2011 01:07 To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [okfn-discuss] "Open Access" publications under CC-NC licences +1 On 12/08/2011 12:56 AM, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: There has been considerable recent discussion about CC-NC licences being used for "Open Access" papers by scholarly publishers. I have written a few blog posts ( http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2011/11/29/scientists-should-never-use-cc-nc-this-explains-why/ http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2011/12/04/more-on-how-commercial-publishers-use-non-commercial-licensing-funders-are-you-really-getting-your-money%E2%80%99s-worth-many-are-not/ , http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2011/12/06/acceptance-of-cc-nc-has-sold-readers-and-authors-seriously-short/ ) and responded to comments. I have summarised this in http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2011/12/07/%E2%80%9Copen-access%E2%80%9D-and-non-commercial-licences-summary/ Ross Mounce has summarised this as: this mess has caused irreparable damage to the re-usability of the literature with which I completely agree. I think it's so serious that it should not be discussed on my blog but brought here. It took me by surprise that authorPays "Open Access" seems to be almost completely CC-NC. (The main open Access publishers such as PLoSONE and BMC have complete OKD-compliance by using CC-BY). CC-NC places so many restrictions on re-use that it is almost useless in science. I believe that the OKFN should take this issue very seriously and with great urgency. We know that multi-author organizations which start using CC-NC find it impossible to chnage later without approaching every author and with scholpub this is out of the question, so the longer this goes on the worse the problem. I believe that OKFN should put together a group which draws together resource material which makes the case against NC and then promotoes this case to publishers and funders. Any aproaches to funders or publishers could be done through IsItOpenData. -- Peter Murray-Rust Reader in Molecular Informatics Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry University of Cambridge CB2 1EW, UK +44-1223-763069<tel:%2B44-1223-763069> _______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss -- iRail vzw/asbl +32(0)486/747122<tel:%2B32%280%29486%2F747122> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss -- Peter Murray-Rust Reader in Molecular Informatics Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry University of Cambridge CB2 1EW, UK +44-1223-763069 The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. _______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
