Thanks, Heather, for this explanation.
Yes, I agree that OA archiving shall be an important part of the system,
no matter what specific OA license is being used, for the preservation
of scholarship independently of the fate or misdoings of a given publisher.
As to the dangers of commercial
*COUNTERATTACK: HANDS OFF FREEDOMS, HANDS ON
KEYBOARDS*http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/9829971/Open-access-plans-are-attack-on-academic-freedoms.html#comment-779907757
The
hi Marcin,
On 2013-01-28, at 3:43 AM, Marcin Wojnarski wrote:
Thanks, Heather, for this explanation.
Yes, I agree that OA archiving shall be an important part of the system, no
matter what specific OA license is being used, for the preservation of
scholarship independently of the fate or
Anyone who buys Springer (hence BMC) has no obligations at all to
continue to provide the BMC articles on an open access basis.
In legal sense that's true, but in practice this is impossible, because
Springer+BMC would totally destroy their credibility as an OA publisher
which they've built
Artexte is launching a digital repository for documents in visual arts in
Quebec and Canada.
Join us at ARTEXTE (2, rue Sainte-Catherine East, room 301, Montréal, H2X 1K4,
Canada) on Saturday, February 9th, 2013 (1:00 - 5:00pm) for the official launch
and discussion.
Tomasz Neugebauer
On 2013-01-28, at 12:29 PM, Marcin Wojnarski wrote:
Commercial use is a broad and vague term. For example, displaying a paper on
a website together with advertisements - is this commercial use or not? I think
most people hope for add-on services to flourish on top of CC-BY literature,
they
Before this goes too far, let's establish that commercial re-use is possible
and is used. Scholars may not be averse to it.
I have in mind monitoring organisations, which for a subscription, will
survey the literature and provide subscribers with relevant data that they
have culled. Think of
Heather and I disagree profoundly on this. I have never met a scientist who
has argued for CC-NC over CC-BY. There is a very strong case against CC-NC,
with significant research into the issues (not just opinions) put by
Hagedorn, Mietchen et al.
Arthur below gives this example of a commercial service scholars might
not be averse to - Medifocus.
As an example, I look at the Medifocus guidebook on peripheral
neuropathy costs $32.95 for the print version or $24.95 for the
electronic version.
https://www.medifocus.com/
Comments:
1.
On 28-Jan-13, at 8:24 PM, Peter Murray-Rust wrote:
Heather and I disagree profoundly on this. I have never met a
scientist who has argued for CC-NC over CC-BY. There is a very strong
case against CC-NC, with significant research into the issues (not
just opinions) put by Hagedorn, Mietchen
10 matches
Mail list logo
