On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:25 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear all, > > Just a point of notice. In the case of hybrid publishing between OA and > paper versions, and in particular for OA monographs, it is perfectly > understandable that licenses forbid commercial exploitation of paper > versions. Unfortunately the CC licenses do not allow provisions such as > commercial use permitted for electronic versions and reserved for paper > versions. One should find a workaround this. > > I'm not sure I understand this. It's the individual article or chapter that would be licensed, not the complete work (monograph or journal issue). The re-user would have to copy the paper either as a photocopy or retyping/redrawing but I don't see how that requires the licensor to have greater rights. Best, > > Philippe > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Heather Joseph <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Excellent question, and thanks thanks to Peter for raising this point. > >> SPARC's Steering Committee is meeting tomorrow, and I will put this > >> item at the top of our list for discussion. If, as I suspect, they > >> want to do an update, I'll will be in touch with Mike Carroll pronto > >> for assistance. > >> > > > > Thanks Heather, > > Have you seen the almost universal CC-NC that Ross Mounce has > accumulated > > for hybridOA? We have to change this now or we will spend a decade trying > > to recover the ground > > > > > >> Very important issue. Again, my thanks for raising it! > >> > >> H. > >> > >> Sent from my iPad > >> > >> On Dec 11, 2011, at 7:51 AM, Daniel Mietchen > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > 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 > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Peter Murray-Rust > > Reader in Molecular Informatics > > Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry > > University of Cambridge > > CB2 1EW, UK > > +44-1223-763069 > > _______________________________________________ > > okfn-discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > okfn-discuss mailing list > [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
_______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
