[GOAL] Re: RCUK Open Access Feedback
On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 21:28 +0900, Andrew A. Adams wrote: David Prosser wrote: Say I wanted to data mine 10,000 articles. I'm at a university, but I am c= o-funded by a pharmaceutical company and there is a possibility that the re= search that I'm doing may result in a new drug discovery, which that compan= y will want to take to market. The 10,000 articles are all 'open access', = but they are under CC-BY-NC-SA licenses. What mechanism is there by which = I can contact all 10,000 authors and gain permission for my research? The intent of CC-NC is that one cannot take the original material, re-mix it (or even just as-is) and sell the resulting new work. It does not mean that the information it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting, but that the expression it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting. A simple example is that a CC-NC licensed book cannot be recorded as an audio play which is then sold. If one makes an audio book it must be available for free. However, copies of a CC-NC book can be distributed to students who are paying for a course in English literature as one of the books studied. I don't understand this concern about 'NC' (non-commercial). I understood that the give-away open access literature was given-away by authors precisely because the motivation for publishing publicly funded research is not for direct commercial gain. Instead, authors derive impact from others reading and citing their work. If a company were to create and sell an audio version of a research work then that increases the author's impact. That doesn't preclude someone else creating a for-free audio version, nor readers accessing the original self-archived or gold-OA text version. OA is not about anti-capitalism - if someone can take the resource (OA research literature), add value and re-sell it (with suitable attribution) then that can only be to the advantage of authors and readers. -- Tim Brody School of Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom Email: tdb2 at ecs.soton.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)23 8059 7698 -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 490 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120319/5d1bd3a8/attachment.bin
[GOAL] Re: RCUK Open Access Feedback
I agree with Tim. Doesn't the 'NC' in CC-BY-NC just mean I can't make money from it and I would resent it if you could ? Jan Velterop ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ** Drs Johannes (Jan) Velterop, CEO Academic Concept Knowledge Ltd. (AQnowledge) +44 7525 026 991 (mobile) +44 1483 579 525 (landline UK) +31 70 75 33 789 (landline NL) Skype: Villavelius Email: velterop at aqnowledge.com velterop at gmail.com aqnowledge.com On 19 Mar 2012, at 11:37, Tim Brody wrote: On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 21:28 +0900, Andrew A. Adams wrote: David Prosser wrote: Say I wanted to data mine 10,000 articles. I'm at a university, but I am c= o-funded by a pharmaceutical company and there is a possibility that the re= search that I'm doing may result in a new drug discovery, which that compan= y will want to take to market. The 10,000 articles are all 'open access', = but they are under CC-BY-NC-SA licenses. What mechanism is there by which = I can contact all 10,000 authors and gain permission for my research? The intent of CC-NC is that one cannot take the original material, re-mix it (or even just as-is) and sell the resulting new work. It does not mean that the information it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting, but that the expression it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting. A simple example is that a CC-NC licensed book cannot be recorded as an audio play which is then sold. If one makes an audio book it must be available for free. However, copies of a CC-NC book can be distributed to students who are paying for a course in English literature as one of the books studied. I don't understand this concern about 'NC' (non-commercial). I understood that the give-away open access literature was given-away by authors precisely because the motivation for publishing publicly funded research is not for direct commercial gain. Instead, authors derive impact from others reading and citing their work. If a company were to create and sell an audio version of a research work then that increases the author's impact. That doesn't preclude someone else creating a for-free audio version, nor readers accessing the original self-archived or gold-OA text version. OA is not about anti-capitalism - if someone can take the resource (OA research literature), add value and re-sell it (with suitable attribution) then that can only be to the advantage of authors and readers. -- Tim Brody School of Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom Email: tdb2 at ecs.soton.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)23 8059 7698 ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL at eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120319/1766ca1a/attachment.html
[GOAL] Re: RCUK Open Access Feedback
On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 21:28 +0900, Andrew A. Adams wrote: David Prosser wrote: Say I wanted to data mine 10,000 articles. I'm at a university, but I am c= o-funded by a pharmaceutical company and there is a possibility that the re= search that I'm doing may result in a new drug discovery, which that compan= y will want to take to market. The 10,000 articles are all 'open access', = but they are under CC-BY-NC-SA licenses. What mechanism is there by which = I can contact all 10,000 authors and gain permission for my research? The intent of CC-NC is that one cannot take the original material, re-mix it (or even just as-is) and sell the resulting new work. It does not mean that the information it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting, but that the expression it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting. A simple example is that a CC-NC licensed book cannot be recorded as an audio play which is then sold. If one makes an audio book it must be available for free. However, copies of a CC-NC book can be distributed to students who are paying for a course in English literature as one of the books studied. I don't understand this concern about 'NC' (non-commercial). I understood that the give-away open access literature was given-away by authors precisely because the motivation for publishing publicly funded research is not for direct commercial gain. Instead, authors derive impact from others reading and citing their work. If a company were to create and sell an audio version of a research work then that increases the author's impact. That doesn't preclude someone else creating a for-free audio version, nor readers accessing the original self-archived or gold-OA text version. OA is not about anti-capitalism - if someone can take the resource (OA research literature), add value and re-sell it (with suitable attribution) then that can only be to the advantage of authors and readers. -- Tim Brody School of Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom Email: t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)23 8059 7698 [ Part 1.2, This is a digitally signed message part ] [ Application/PGP-SIGNATURE (Name: signature.asc) 501 bytes. ] [ Unable to print this part. ] [ Part 2: Attached Text ] ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Re: RCUK Open Access Feedback
I agree with Tim. Doesn't the 'NC' in CC-BY-NC just mean I can't make money from it and I would resent it if you could ? Jan Velterop         â â  ⢠⢠⢠ ⢠⢠⢠ â â ** Drs Johannes (Jan) Velterop, CEOAcademic Concept Knowledge Ltd. (AQnowledge) +44 7525 026 991 (mobile) +44 1483 579 525 (landline UK) +31 70 75 33 789 (landline NL) Skype: Villavelius Email: velte...@aqnowledge.com velte...@gmail.com aqnowledge.com On 19 Mar 2012, at 11:37, Tim Brody wrote: On Sun, 2012-03-18 at 21:28 +0900, Andrew A. Adams wrote: David Prosser wrote: Say I wanted to data mine 10,000 articles.  I'm at a university, but I am c= o-funded by a pharmaceutical company and there is a possibility that the re= search that I'm doing may result in a new drug discovery, which that compan= y will want to take to market.  The 10,000 articles are all 'open access', = but they are under CC-BY-NC-SA licenses.  What mechanism is there by which = I can contact all 10,000 authors and gain permission for my research? The intent of CC-NC is that one cannot take the original material, re-mix it (or even just as-is) and sell the resulting new work. It does not mean that the information it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting, but that the expression it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting. A simple example is that a CC-NC licensed book cannot be recorded as an audio play which is then sold. If one makes an audio book it must be available for free. However, copies of a CC-NC book can be distributed to students who are paying for a course in English literature as one of the books studied. I don't understand this concern about 'NC' (non-commercial). I understood that the give-away open access literature was given-away by authors precisely because the motivation for publishing publicly funded research is not for direct commercial gain. Instead, authors derive impact from others reading and citing their work. If a company were to create and sell an audio version of a research work then that increases the author's impact. That doesn't preclude someone else creating a for-free audio version, nor readers accessing the original self-archived or gold-OA text version. OA is not about anti-capitalism - if someone can take the resource (OA research literature), add value and re-sell it (with suitable attribution) then that can only be to the advantage of authors and readers. -- Tim Brody School of Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ United Kingdom Email: t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)23 8059 7698 ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal [ Part 2: Attached Text ] ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
[GOAL] Re: RCUK Open Access Feedback
Say I wanted to data mine 10,000 articles. I'm at a university, but I am co-funded by a pharmaceutical company and there is a possibility that the research that I'm doing may result in a new drug discovery, which that company will want to take to market. The 10,000 articles are all 'open access', but they are under CC-BY-NC-SA licenses. What mechanism is there by which I can contact all 10,000 authors and gain permission for my research? David David C Prosser PhD Executive Director, RLUK Tel: +44 (0) 20 7848 2737 Mob: +44 (0) 7825 454586 www.rluk.ac.uk RLUK Twitter feed: RL_UK Director's Twitter feed: RLUK_David Maughan Library and Information Services Centre, King's College London, Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1LR Registered Company no: 2733294 Registered Charity no: 1026543 On 14 Mar 2012, at 16:40, Heather Morrison wrote: Following are my comments to the RCUK open access consultation. Dear RCUK Open Access Policy group, First of all let me say congratulations and thank you to RCUK for your continuing inspiring leadership on open access policy. Following are my comments, based on many years of experience in open access policy advocacy, my work as a professional librarian and adjunct faculty at the University of British Columbia's School of Library, Archival and Information Studies, where I have developed and taught courses on scholarly communication, and my doctoral studies (communications, in progress) in the area of scholarly communication and open access. Overall, from my perspective this draft policy introduces two important innovations: reducing the permitted embargo period, and pushing towards libre open access (e.g. allowing use for data and text-mining). In brief, I recommend strengthening the language on shortening embargo periods, and eliminating reference to CC-BY in favor of broader language against restrictions and requiring formats usable for text and data-mining purposes. Also, I recommend that the policy specify immediate deposit, with optional delayed release to accomodate the permitted embargoes. With respect to the embargo period, I recommend strengthening the language indicating that any permitted embargo periods are designed as a temporary measure to give publishers time to adjust to an open access environment, with a view to eventually requiring open access immediately on publication. This language can be found on page 4, I recommend including this in the introductory language to underscore this point. Kudos to RCUK for adopting a leadership position on libre open access. However, I would recommend against specifying the Creative Commons CC-BY license. While many open access advocates understandably see CC-BY as the expression of the BOAI definition of open access, my considered opinion is that CC-BY is a weak license for libre OA which fails to protect OA downstream and will not accomplish the Budapest vision of open access,. My perspective is that the best license for libre open access is Creative Commons - Attribution - Noncommercial - Sharealike (CC-BY-NC-SA), as this protects OA downstream (recognizing that the current CC NC definition is problematic, and noting that commercial rights should be retained by authors, not publishers). As one example of where open access might need such protection, because CC-BY allows for resale of open access materials: if all of PubMedCentral were CC-BY, a commercial company could copy the whole thing, perhaps add some value, and sell their version of PMC. They could not legally stop PMC from providing free access. However, I very much doubt that CC-BY could prevent such a company from lobbying to remove funding for the public version. If this sounds ludicrous and unconscionable, may I present as evidence that just such a scenario is realistic: 1) the efforts a few years ago by the American Chemical Society to prevent the U.S. government from providing PubChem on the grounds that this was competition with a private entity; 2) the Research Works Act, and 3) the current anti-FRPAA lobbying in the U.S., which, similarly to the Research Works Act, claims that published research funded by the public is private research works which should belong solely to the publisher. Another reason for avoiding CC-BY is that while the contributions of funders are very important, so are the contributions of scholar authors. Many scholars do not wish to see others who have contributed nothing to a scholarly work sell their work and pocket the money; I certainly don't. For example, Peter Suber recently posted this note to the SPARC Open Access Forum which expresses the distress of an author who published CC-BY in a BMC journal and then found a bogus publisher selling her article for $3. https://groups.google.com/a/arl.org/group/sparc-oaforum/browse_thread/thread/fc977cabd0d59bcc#. The more work that is published CC-BY, the
[GOAL] Re: RCUK Open Access Feedback
David Prosser wrote: Say I wanted to data mine 10,000 articles. I'm at a university, but I am c= o-funded by a pharmaceutical company and there is a possibility that the re= search that I'm doing may result in a new drug discovery, which that compan= y will want to take to market. The 10,000 articles are all 'open access', = but they are under CC-BY-NC-SA licenses. What mechanism is there by which = I can contact all 10,000 authors and gain permission for my research? The intent of CC-NC is that one cannot take the original material, re-mix it (or even just as-is) and sell the resulting new work. It does not mean that the information it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting, but that the expression it contains cannot be used in a commercial setting. A simple example is that a CC-NC licensed book cannot be recorded as an audio play which is then sold. If one makes an audio book it must be available for free. However, copies of a CC-NC book can be distributed to students who are paying for a course in English literature as one of the books studied. -- Professor Andrew A Adams aaa at meiji.ac.jp Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan http://www.a-cubed.info/
