Another point: we agree that facts are not copyrightable. Assuming we are correct in this assumption, there is no argument for limiting this work to material licensed CC-BY. This kind of work could be carried out with material under any kind of license including all rights reserved.
best, Heather -------- Original message -------- From: Peter Murray-Rust <pm...@cam.ac.uk> Date: 2017-02-27 10:30 AM (GMT-05:00) To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal@eprints.org> Subject: Re: [GOAL] [job] WikiFactMine: Open Access Wikimedian In Residence in Cambridge UK On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Heather Morrison <heather.morri...@uottawa.ca<mailto:heather.morri...@uottawa.ca>> wrote: >From a copyright perspective: If work is published under CC-BY and subsequently released by a downstream re-user under CC-0, this is a breach of the requirement of attribution, isn't it? Facts are not copyrightable and downstream facts would therefore be released as CC 0. CC licenses involve waiver of rights under copyright. Using CC-0 on other people's work involves asserting copyright in order to waive it. If this project is not intending to produce work under copyright it does not make sense to assert copyright. CC 0 is NOT an assertion of copyright. It is a dedication (as far as is legally possible) into the public domain. See https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0 -- Peter Murray-Rust Reader Emeritus in Molecular Informatics Unilever Centre, Dept. Of Chemistry University of Cambridge CB2 1EW, UK +44-1223-763069
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
