On 10 December 2013 13:38, Jan Velterop <velte...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10 Dec 2013, at 13:05, Peter Murray-Rust <pm...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > > Elsevier are the worst offender that I have investigated, followed by > Springer who took all my Open Access images, badged them as (C) > SpringerImages and offered them for resale at 60 USD per image. Just > because OA is only 5% of your business doesn't mean practice can be > substandard. > > > Peter, what licence did you publish your OA images under? CC-BY? If so, > re-labelling them as "© Springer" is a form of copyright breach > (actionable?), but selling them isn't, of course >
Potentially, the images could be claimed to be derivative works, which could then by copyrighted. Springer no doubt does format conversions, resizing, etc. that may qualify this. And "branding" would presumably be watermarking to make the images unusable without a fee. However, even a copyrighted derivative should acknowledge the original copyright. Or even in terms of watermarking to make unpaid images unusable, they could use the original copyright. As Jan notes, providing a separate service that may be of value to those purchasing content via that means is not necessarily in conflict with open access. And as you have entered into a publishing agreement with Springer, that will no doubt include granting the rights to re-use the content elsewhere - including making the images available in a commercial service, even if the OA licence is infact CC-NC (or CC-NC-ND). (In fact, this can be of use to users, being able to purchase commercial use rights where the CC licence does not provide them). None of this [should] prevent the free use / re-use of images made available within the context of an open access article - i.e. if I go to the open access article, and download an image from there, I should be able to use it in accordance with the CC licence granted. Providing a separate, chargeable service to serve a different market with different needs is not necessarily wrong - offering different sizes, tagging for discovery (of images, rather than articles), possibly commercial rights, are all "value adds". Ultimately people can choose to use [and pay] for it, or not. But they ought to be able to seek out the open access publication, and use the material acquired from there under the terms of the open access licence that is given. G
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
