Hi John, This is very useful information. According to the Budapest and Berlin statements, resources provided in open access would be OER, I think. Since the concept has become ambiguous through the different practices, the distinction between "libre" and "gratis" clarifies most of the current "open access" practices. In terms of the relationship between OA and OER, gratis wouldn't be OER and libre would, imo.
The problem with the repositories I mentioned in the first place is that the people managing them seem to have no idea about these issues. They call them open (or open access) repositories, but then just store the items there without any statement whatsoever on what the policy of use is. Many of them are default installations of DSpace where you can read below all, or almost all, items: "Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.". As I said before, this is not a problem in practical terms - you can still take the materials to use with your students or point your students to them. Problems arise when you are studying or debating these issues and people call these materials OER, which they are not for the most part. Further clarifying these points will hopefully bring more awareness both to authors and to those who manage the repositories to the need of clearly stating the terms of use of the resources they are making available online. Because the default of any non-specified resource is "all rights reserved", this will also (hopefully) increase the number of educational resources with less restrictions. Regards, José -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WikiEducator" group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
