Yes Sally, that is the rationale that I would use were I in that situation.
It is analogous to a newspaper cutting service, or to writing a commissioned
report which cites freely available articles as well as ones behind a toll
barrier. The user is paying for my work in compilation.

 

Arthur Sale

Tasmania, Australia

 

From: goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf
Of Sally Morris
Sent: Monday, 26 March 2012 7:17 AM
To: 'Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)'
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Libre open access, copyright, patent law, and other
intellectual property matters

 

Playing devil's advocate:  aren't people (arguably) paying for the service
provided in gathering together the articles in which they might be
interested in an easily accessible/searchable form?

 

Sally

 

Sally Morris

South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex, UK  BN13 3UU

Tel:  +44 (0)1903 871286

Email:  sally at morris-assocs.demon.co.uk

 

 

  _____  

From: goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf
Of Couture Marc
Sent: 25 March 2012 17:29
To: goal at eprints.org
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Libre open access, copyright, patent law, and other
intellectual property matters

[Apologies for cross-posting]

 

On March 23, 2012, Klaus Graf wrote:

 

> 

> It's illegal to hide CC-BY contributions behind a pawywall.

> 

 

quoting the following excerpt of the legal code:

 

"You may not impose any effective technological measures on the Work that
restrict the ability of a recipient of the Work from You to exercise the
rights granted to that recipient under the terms of the License"

 

Well, without delving too much into legal intricacies, let's just say that
even if it may seem so at first glance, this doesn't mean that giving access
to the Work (or to a derivative work based upon the work) through a paywall
is forbidden.

 

If it were, then what would be the purpose of the licenses CC-BY-NC-ND (for
the Work) and CC-BY-NC (for derivative works)?

 

Instead, the excerpt above may be interpreted, without disrupting the whole
CC logic, as meaning: If "You" give access to a copy of the Work (behind a
paywall or not), "You" can't apply to it any DRM technology that would
forbid the recipient to reproduce, etc. (all the rights included in the
license, see part 3 of legal code) the Work.

 

I agree that putting a CC-BY Work behind a paywall is almost certainly
dishonest, if not fraudulent, because it makes sense only if you somehow
hide the fact that the work is freely available elsewhere. Things are
different for a derivative work, which may offer enough added value to
justify a fee. And such a work is not bound by the Work's license conditions
(unless SA is added). It's here that the NC option plays its intended role:
an author decides if others can make money (by adding a paywall, say) or not
from derivative works based upon his or her work.

 

Marc Couture

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120326/a6420143/attachment.html
 

Reply via email to