[GOAL] Last two weeks to register for OASPA 2019 Annual conference

[Bernie Folan]

Please note that there are just two weeks remaining to register for the
OASPA 2019. The conference will be held at the Royal Danish Library in
Copenhagen on 24-26th September 2019.

Registrations will close on September 10th. Details of how to register can
be found here .

Session topics at this year’s conference include Funders, Inclusive
Globalisation, Emerging Research, Community Owned Infrastructures, Research
Culture, and Open Books.

For full details of the finalised program, please visit the OASPA website
here .

Best wishes,
Bernie Folan


*Bernie Folan*
Events and Communications Coordinator, OASPA
bernie.fo...@oaspa.org
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Informed consent and open licensing: some questions for discussion

[Martyn Rittman]

Heather raises a good point here related to certain types of images. 
MDPI provides a sample consent form (you can access the link e.g. at 
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijms/instructions#ethics) in which we try 
to make clear the implications of publishing in open access, but when it 
comes to reuse there are clearly other rights that should be enforced 
for the protection of patients.


I don't recall a case where this has been flagged as an issue, but we 
have had similar cases with images taken by someone other than the 
authors and numerous cases of previously published images where the 
authors needed permission to republish. Here, a more restrictive 
copyright (e.g. all rights reserved) can be applied to the image than to 
the rest of the text. I would suggest that this could provide a solution 
in most cases.


Best regards,
Martyn

--
Martyn Rittman, Ph.D.
Publishing Director, MDPI
St. Alban-Anlage 66, 4052 Basel, Switzerland
+41 61 683 77 35
ritt...@mdpi.com
www.mdpi.com

On 27/08/2019 17:09, Heather Morrison wrote:
 > The purpose of this post is to encourage sharing of knowledge and > 
ideas on the topic of modifying informed consent when working with > 
human subjects to accommodate open licensing. Questions can be found > 
at the end of the post. > > > Researchers who work with human subjects, 
as is common in disciplines > such as health sciences, education, and 
social sciences, are expected > to obtain informed consent from subjects 
prior to starting research > for ethical and legal reasons. > > > To 
obtain informed consent, researchers must explain what will happen > 
with the subject's information and material (if applicable) and the > 
potential consequences for the subject (beneficial and potential > 
harm). > > > Consent in the context of traditional publishing meant 
consent to > publish in one specific venue, typically under All Rights 
Reserved > copyright. Policies and procedures for informed consent 
developed in > this context will need to be modified in order for 
authors to publish > using open licenses that actively invite re-use 
(and sometimes > modification) through human and machine-readable 
licenses, in some > cases for commercial use. > > > To illustrate the 
difference: an educational researcher might wish to > obtain and use a 
photo of schoolchildren in a publication. In the > traditional context, 
this permission involved publication in one > venue (one journal or one 
book), with re-publication requiring > permission from the copyright 
owner (publisher and/or author). Until > recently, such material, while 
not forbidden to the general public, > would usually only be found in an 
academic library. This is still the > case with journals and books that 
are not yet open access. Open > access per se expands access to anyone 
with an internet connection, > but free access on the Internet is 
automatically covered by copyright > in all countries that are 
signatories to the Berne Convention. Open > licensing goes beyond 
expanding access to inviting re-use. In the > case of Creative Commons 
licensing, the invitation is extended via a > human readable form that 
is designed to facilitate easy understanding > of permitted uses, a 
machine readable form that can be used by > searchers to facilitate 
limiting searches to content by desired use, > and a legal license that 
most people are not likely to read. > > > For example, publication under 
a CC-BY license would include > traditional uses, and other beneficial 
uses such as re-use by another > researcher building on the work of the 
original. CC-BY would also > invite uses that could be harmful to the 
subjects, such as targeted > commercial social media advertising or use 
of a modified photo in a > video game (schoolkid becomes loser kid, 
perhaps target practice). > > > This does not mean that such uses would 
necessarily be legal, rather > that open licensing is an invitation that 
makes such uses more likely > to occur. The harmful uses described above 
are likely a violation of > moral rights under copyright, privacy and/or 
publicity rights. There > are potential legal remedies, but these can 
only be pursued after the > harm is done and discovered by a subject 
with the means and incentive > to pursue legal remedies. > > > The Chang 
v. Virgin Mobile case is an illustration of what can happen > with 
sensitive material and lack of understanding of the implications > of 
licensing. In brief, a photographer took a photo of a minor girl > 
(family friend) and posted it to Flickr under a CC-BY license. Virgin > 
Mobile interpreted the license as an invitation to use the girl's > 
photo in an ad campaign. The girl's family sued Creative Commons > 
(dropped this one) and Virgin Mobile. The case was eventually dropped > 
for jurisdictional reasons (girl in Texas, company in Australia). > 
Lawrence Lessig wrote about the case, arguing that Virgin's > 
interpretation of copyright was correct, but that the girl still h

Re: [GOAL] Informed consent and open licensing: some questions for discussion

[Heather Morrison]

Thank you Martyn, this is very helpful.

As an author, I have appreciated MDPI's flexibility with respect to licenses. I 
am sure that other publishers have similar situations where re-use of material 
and/or accommodating particular authors requires flexibility with respect to 
licensing.

This mixed licensing environment raises a number of questions, mostly technical 
ones. Fully answering the questions requires an understanding of who proposes 
to use these works, and how. Following are 2 questions that I hope will further 
understanding of the issues, one for MDPI and other publishers and one for 
everyone.

  1.  For MDPI and other publishers: based on the Jan. 31, 2019 DOAJ metadata, 
it appears that all or nearly all of MDPI journals have answered "yes" to 
"Machine-readable CC licensing information embedded or displayed in articles". 
Q: can you explain how embedding works when the CC license does not apply to 
all of the content in the article, as is the case when re-use of an item like 
an image requires permission and must be under All Rights Reserved terms? For 
example, do the elements that require separate licensing have separate metadata 
embedded licensing? Does the embedded metadata at the article level state the 
default license only or does it speak to the separately licensed material, in 
specific or general terms?
  2.  Everyone: who is using embedded licensing metadata (as opposed to 
displayed), and how? Are there hopes or expectations of how this metadata will 
be used in future for which there are no examples yet?

Further discussion - answers or more questions - is encouraged.


Dr. Heather Morrison

Associate Professor, School of Information Studies, University of Ottawa

Professeur Agrégé, École des Sciences de l'Information, Université d'Ottawa

Principal Investigator, Sustaining the Knowledge Commons, a SSHRC Insight 
Project

sustainingknowledgecommons.org

heather.morri...@uottawa.ca

https://uniweb.uottawa.ca/?lang=en#/members/706

[On research sabbatical July 1, 2019 - June 30, 2020]


From: goal-boun...@eprints.org  on behalf of Martyn 
Rittman 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 7:02 AM
To: goal@eprints.org 
Subject: Re: [GOAL] Informed consent and open licensing: some questions for 
discussion

Attention : courriel externe | external email
Heather raises a good point here related to certain types of images. MDPI 
provides a sample consent form (you can access the link e.g. at 
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijms/instructions#ethics) in which we try to make 
clear the implications of publishing in open access, but when it comes to reuse 
there are clearly other rights that should be enforced for the protection of 
patients.

I don't recall a case where this has been flagged as an issue, but we have had 
similar cases with images taken by someone other than the authors and numerous 
cases of previously published images where the authors needed permission to 
republish. Here, a more restrictive copyright (e.g. all rights reserved) can be 
applied to the image than to the rest of the text. I would suggest that this 
could provide a solution in most cases.

Best regards,
Martyn

--
Martyn Rittman, Ph.D.
Publishing Director, MDPI
St. Alban-Anlage 66, 4052 Basel, Switzerland
+41 61 683 77 35
ritt...@mdpi.com
www.mdpi.com

On 27/08/2019 17:09, Heather Morrison wrote:
> > The purpose of this post is to encourage sharing of knowledge and > ideas 
> > on the topic of modifying informed consent when working with > human 
> > subjects to accommodate open licensing. Questions can be found > at the end 
> > of the post. > > > Researchers who work with human subjects, as is common 
> > in disciplines > such as health sciences, education, and social sciences, 
> > are expected > to obtain informed consent from subjects prior to starting 
> > research > for ethical and legal reasons. > > > To obtain informed consent, 
> > researchers must explain what will happen > with the subject's information 
> > and material (if applicable) and the > potential consequences for the 
> > subject (beneficial and potential > harm). > > > Consent in the context of 
> > traditional publishing meant consent to > publish in one specific venue, 
> > typically under All Rights Reserved > copyright. Policies and procedures 
> > for informed consent developed in > this context will need to be modified 
> > in order for authors to publish > using open licenses that actively invite 
> > re-use (and sometimes > modification) through human and machine-readable 
> > licenses, in some > cases for commercial use. > > > To illustrate the 
> > difference: an educational researcher might wish to > obtain and use a 
> > photo of schoolchildren in a publication. In the > traditional context, 
> > this permission involved publication in one > venue (one journal or one 
> > book), with re-publication requiring > permission from the copyright owner 
> >