Hiya,

 

Please note that I am not proposing that one specific license be adopted. Different open access initiatives have different needs; the evidence for this is that Creative Commons developed a suite of licenses, and that a significant number of them (arguably a majority) have opted for a NC license. See http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/explore/open-access-survey-june2014.pdf

 

It is the original proposition that needs evidence to support it. The assertion that CC-BY-NC-SA does not count as full open access is contentious. The assertion does not represent existing practice nor a majority view. The assertion is a proposal for narrowing the scope of what counts as open access. There is, in my view, no good reason to support this assertion. It should be rejected.

 

-- Stephen

 

 

From: boai-forum-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk [mailto:boai-forum-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Jan Velterop
Sent: June-22-15 9:33 AM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Cc: <boai-forum@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Subject: [BOAI] Re: [GOAL] Re: Re: a chronology about open access

 

"This sort of insistence on One Special License is exactly what is limiting the adoption of open access."

 

Really? Any evidence? I'd welcome it if your definition of open access found universal acceptance. Would be a great step forward. 

 

Jan Velterop

 


On 22 Jun 2015, at 12:34, Stephen Downes <stephen@downes.ca> wrote:

> as I would define it

 

And I would define it as *more* free than licenses thatg allow people to charge money for access to the document.

 

This sort of insistence on One Special License is exactly what is limiting the adoption of open access.

 

-- Stephen

 

From: boai-forum-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk [mailto:boai-forum-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Jan Velterop
Sent: June-22-15 7:48 AMYou are the one with a very specific definition of open access to propose
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Cc: boai-forum@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Subject: [BOAI] Re: [GOAL] a chronology about open access

 

Nice chronology of open access. Unfortunately CC-BY-NC-SA, so itself not full open access as I would define it (though better than pay-walled, obviously). 

Jan Velterop


On 22 Jun 2015, at 10:32, marie lebert <marie.lebert@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear all:

 

 

_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal