: goal-boun...@eprints.org [goal-boun...@eprints.org] on behalf of Heather
Morrison [heather.morri...@uottawa.ca]
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2018 8:02 PM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: Re: [GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] Willinsky proposes short copyright for
researcharticles
Public
> On Behalf Of Ross
>Mounce
>Sent: Friday, March 23, 2018 5:17 PM
>To: David Wojick <dwoj...@craigellachie.us>
>Cc: Global Open Access List(Successor of AmSci) <goal@eprints.org>; SANFORD G
>THATCHER <s...@psu.edu>; Schoolcom listserv <scholc...@lists.ala.org>
>Subject
2018 5:17 PM
To: David Wojick <dwoj...@craigellachie.us>
Cc: Global Open Access List(Successor of AmSci) <goal@eprints.org>; SANFORD G
THATCHER <s...@psu.edu>; Schoolcom listserv <scholc...@lists.ala.org>
Subject: Re: [GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] Willinsky proposes short c
From: David Wojick <dwoj...@craigellachie.us>
Date: 2018-03-23 2:43 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: SANFORD G THATCHER <s...@psu.edu>
Cc: "Global Open Access List(Successor of AmSci)" <goal@eprints.org>, Schoolcom
listserv <scholc...@lists.ala.org>
Subject: Re: [GOAL] [S
But you still have to determine what is and what is not a journal article for
these purposes. Does it include an article in a semi-popular publication like
Scientific American or National Geographic? Even articles in places like the
New York Review of Books can be very scholarly, complete with
Saying that shortening the term of copyright for journal articles somehow
limits academic freedom seems like a strange argument (at best). It may
limit academic opportunity to make money in the rare cases you mention but
most legislation involves tradeoffs like this. The benefits of OA are
Who would benefit from public domain (or CC-BY) as default to scholarly works?
I argue: Elsevier would be the greatest beneficiary, and would do so through
using such works as part of toll access products such as Scopus and their
metadata services sold to rankings agencies (e.g. Times Higher
It's highly unlikely that Frankfurt or the other author I mentioned received
any federal funding that entailed making their work public domain. The
question arises--as it does for forcing authors to accept CC BY as the default
OA license--whether academic freedom should be limited in this way or
The "On Bullshit" example is quite an interesting one.
But I looked it up for the finer details of it - it is clearly not just a
simple "reprint".
Frankfurt’s essay "On Bullshit" was just 20 pages [Raritan Quarterly
Review 6 (1986) pp 81-100]
Frankfurt's book "On Bullshit" is 80 pages [Princeton
Sandy, I think the argument here is that the benefits of OA are
sufficiently great that isolated instances like this do not outweigh them.
Keep in mind too that if any article flows from federal funding it will
already be made public after 12 months, at least the accepted manuscript
will be,
10 matches
Mail list logo
