OK, so what's the process of updating this author addendum? Daniel
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <[email protected]> wrote: > I have discovered to my surprise and disappointment that the SPARC/SC author > addendum for scholarly publishing requests the publisher to allow the author > to distribute their work under a CC-NC or equivalent licence. The addendum > was created as a joint activity between Science Commons and SPARC (copied). > http://www.arl.org/sparc/author/addendum.shtml > and > http://www.arl.org/sparc/bm~doc/Access-Reuse_Addendum.pdf > > 4. Author’s Retention of Rights. Notwithstanding any terms in the > Publication Agreement to the contrary, AUTHOR and > PUBLISHER agree that in addition to any rights under copyright retained by > Author in the Publication Agreement, Author > retains: (i) the rights to reproduce, to distribute, to publicly perform, > and to publicly display the Article in any medium for noncommercial > purposes; (ii) the right to prepare derivative works from the Article; and > (iii) the right to authorize others to make > any non-commercial use of the Article so long as Author receives credit as > author and the journal in which the Article has been > published is cited as the source of first publication of the Article. For > example, Author may make and distribute copies in the > course of teaching and research and may post the Article on personal or > institutional Web sites and in other open-access digital > repositories. > > This was crafted in 2006 and since then there is abundant evidence and > argument that CC-NC is extremely limiting (e.g. no permission to use > diagrans in textbooks and also unworkable). We have heard on this list that > CC are considering an option to retire CC-NC. > > The addendum was primarily crafted for cases where the author did not pay > for publication. Yet almost all publishers now licence PAID "open Access" as > CC-NC. > > Michael Carroll (copied) was one of the authors of the SPARC addendum but > now argues strongly for "full open Access" - i.e. libre-OA, OKD compliant: > http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001210 > Yet CC-NC is becoming more common, not less, in paid "Open Access". I do not > know why this is happening but the publishers are using CC-NC even with fees > of up to 5000 USD per article. The more that this is allowed to happen > unchallenged, the more we destroy any hope of real Open access, even when > paid by funders. > > P. > -- > Peter Murray-Rust > Reader in Molecular Informatics > Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry > University of Cambridge > CB2 1EW, UK > +44-1223-763069 > > _______________________________________________ > open-science mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science > _______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
