Thanks for the hat tip Peter! Sridhar, here is my argument for why an open access should be fully open access - meaning CC BY.
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.100 1210 Best, Mike Michael W. Carroll Professor of Law and Director, Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property American University, Washington College of Law 4801 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20016 (202) 274-4047 (voice) (202) 730-4756 (fax) vcard: http://www.wcl.american.edu/faculty/mcarroll/vcard.vcf Research papers: http://works.bepress.com/michael_carroll/ <http://law.bepress.com/michael_carroll/> http://ssrn.com/author=330326 blog: http://www.carrollogos.blogspot.com/ <http://www.carrollogos.org/> See also www.creativecommons.org <http://www.creativecommons.org/> From: goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Peter Murray-Rust Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:33 AM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: what is a suitable CC license for an scholarly openaccess journal On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Sridhar Gutam <gutam2000 at gmail.com> wrote: Dear All, In the year 2009, when we launched the Open Access Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (OAJMAP) <http://www.oajmap.in> from Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Association of India (MAPAI) <http://www.mapai.co.nr> we have asked a question on a OA forum on what should be the suitable CC license to apply for the OAJMAP. We were told and we also got convienced that we should go for CC BY ND. But now as we are progressing, I feel unfortable in using 'ND'. Why?? the license says -- No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. But, all the research is derived out from the existing and new things would be built on the existing. I would like to advice to the Editorial Board, OAJMAP and the Management Committee, MAPAI to go for CC-BY. Whats your suggestions pleases?? Sridhar I would strongly support CC-BY. There has been a lot of discussion recently about this and two papers by Mike Carroll and others arguing convincingly that only CC-BY makes sense. CC-NC is impossible to define or operate in practice and only serves to prevent useful things happening. CC-ND prevents any normal scholarly and other re-use. The funding agencies are all now insisting on CC-BY for "Open Access". So by adopting that you become acceptable target for publishing their funded work. P. __________________________________________________________ Sridhar Gutam PhD, ARS, Patent Laws (NALSAR), IP & Biotech. (WIPO) Senior Scientist (Plant Physiology) Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture Rehmankhera, Kakori Post Lucknow 227107, Uttar Pradesh, India Phone: +91-522-2841022/23/24; Fax: +91-522-2841025 <tel:%2B91-522-2841025> Mobile:+91-9005760036/8005346136 Publications: http://works.bepress.com/sridhar_gutam/ _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL at eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal -- Peter Murray-Rust Reader in Molecular Informatics Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry University of Cambridge CB2 1EW, UK +44-1223-763069 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120426/780d5264/attachment-0001.html
