“In the last round of author sharing policy revisions, Elsevier created a labyrinthine title-by-title embargo structure requiring embargoes from 12-48 months for author sharing via institutional repository (IR), while permitting immediate sharing via author’s personal website or blog. At the same time, all pre-publication versions are to bear a Creative Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND) license. At the time this policy was announced, it was rightly criticized by many in the scholarly communication community as overly complicated and unnecessary. However, this CC licensing requirement creates an avenue for subverting the embargo in the IR to achieve quicker open distribution of the author’s accepted manuscript. In short, authors may post an appropriately licensed copy on their personal site, at which point we may deposit without embargo in the IR, not through the license granted in the publication agreement, but through the CC license on the author’s version, which the sharing policy mandates. This poster will outline this issue, our experimentation with application, and engage viewers in questions regarding its potential risks, benefits, and workflows.”
English Translation (Google): Open Access Monographs
“Es wirkt ja schon widersprüchlich, wenn eine Monographie zu Open Access zunächst geschlossen publiziert wird und erst in einem Jahr unter einer CC-BY-Lizenz freigegeben wird. Ich kenne allerdings dieses Dilemma auch aus Autorensicht und möchte mich vor diesem Hintergrund zur aktuellen Kritik am Praxishandbuch Open Access äussern.”
English Translation (Google): “It is already contradictory if a monograph on Open Access is first published in a closed version and is only released in a year under a CC-BY license. I know, however, this dilemma also from authoring and would like to express myself against this background to the current criticism of the Praxishandbuch Open Access.”
“The new book Open: The Philosophy and Practices that are Revolutionizing Education and Science, edited by Rajiv Jhangiani and Robert Biswas-Diener, features the work of open advocates around the world, including Cable Green, Director of Open Education at Creative Commons. This excerpt from his chapter, ‘Open Licensing and Open Education Licensing Policy,’ provides a summary of open licensing for education, as well as delves into the philosophical and technical underpinnings of his work in ‘open.’
“CC BY in fully open access journals is by far the dominant article type published by OASPA members. However, there is a notable increase in CC BY articles published in hybrid journals, as well as articles published under a CC BY-NC license in fully OA journals, pointing to an increase in articles published as OA generally.
Usage of the CC BY-NC-SA license has fallen in both hybrid and fully-OA journals published by OASPA members….”
“I have noticed before people on Flickr who give their work a CC license and then complain that folks take their photos without informing them (attribution, yes; informing/thanking, no). Sure, it’s good courtesy to thank folks if you use their photos, but such a hassle to do it for each photo you use on a slide deck or such. The whole point of using CC licensed stuff is to not always ask permission. That’s what the CC license is. Permission to anyone. To do what the license permits you to do. I realized that I always ‘favorite’ any photo I’m planning to use, so I guess I’m giving the creator some kind of indication that I like their photo, but not really telling them I’m planning to use it, or how.
I remember learning this the first time someone republished something of mine without my permission. If it’s CC licensed, the whole point is to tell them they don’t need to seek permission each time. It’s good courtesy, I think, to inform the author, but it’s not necessary. But it’s complex. If a for-profit entity republished my CC-BY-NC article, but publishes it openly and for free, is that a commercial use? What if the space has ads on it, is that a commercial use? If I publish my blog CC-BY and a for-profit magazine regularly republishes it, am I really OK with that? Am I OK with a magazine with values opposed to my own constantly republishing my stuff without my permission? What about if they take derivatives of my writing and use it in a different context, to really make an opposing point to mine, is that acceptable to me? These are not trivial questions, I think, for openness advocates to ask themselves.”
Abstract: “This article discusses the resistance to the Digital Revolution and the emergence of a social movement “resisting the resistance.” Mass empowerment has political implications that may provoke reactionary counteractions. Ultimately—as I have discussed elsewhere—resistance to the Digital Revolution can be seen as a response to Baudrillard’s call to a return to prodigality beyond the structural scarcity of the capitalistic market economy. In Baudrillard’s terms, by increasingly commodifying knowledge and expanding copyright protection, we are taming limitless power with artificial scarcity to keep in place a dialectic of penury and unlimited need. In this paper, I will focus on certain global movements that do resist copyright expansion, such as creative commons, the open access movement, the Pirate Party, the A2K movement and cultural environmentalism. A nuanced discussion of these campaigns must account for the irrelevance of copyright in the public mind, the emergence of new economics of digital content distribution in the Internet, the idea of the death of copyright, and the demise of traditional gatekeepers. Scholarly and market alternatives to traditional copyright merit consideration here, as well. I will conclude my review of this movement “resisting the resistance” to the Digital Revolution by sketching out a roadmap for copyright reform that builds upon its vision.”
“Techdirt has been warning about the problems with the Creative Commons Non-Commercial License (CC NC) for many, many years. Last September, Mike wrote about an important case involving the CC NC license, brought by Great Minds, an educational non-profit organization, against FedEx, the shipping giant. Copy shops owned by FedEx photocopied some of Great Minds’ works on behalf of school districts. The material had been released by Great Minds under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license — that is, the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license. The issue was whether a company like Fedex could make copies on behalf of a non-commercial organization, of material released under a license that stipulated non-commercial use. Happily, the judge in the case has ruled that it can….”
“The Director of Product Engineering reports to the CEO and will lead the development and implementation of CC’s products and services. You’ll be responsible for the CC Search roadmap and the review and enhancement of existing tools to ensure their successful adoption on the web. This is a rare opportunity to lead within an organization that is fundamental to sharing online, operating at a global scale. The successful candidate will lead a technical team to meet the needs of this vital organization, and to build a more vibrant, usable global commons, powered by collaboration and gratitude.
We believe that diverse teams build better organizations and better services. Applications from qualified candidates from all backgrounds, including those from under-represented communities, are very welcome.
The Director of Product Engineering leads the technology team to:
Develop, lead and implement an ambitious product strategy, including a product and service roadmap for CC Search and other relevant services. Lead a small team aligned with our goal of a more vibrant, usable commons powered by collaboration and gratitude
Attract and oversee a small team of software developers and UX designers to build innovative, robust software both for CC use and for public release
Work in the open, in public repositories, open chat rooms, public wikis and a global community
Work with the CEO and Director of Development to seek funding for CC’s various technical projects
Represent the organization and provide technical leadership within various open communities and with CC partners. Coordinate with other outside communities, companies, and institutions to further Creative Commons’ mission, for example: W3C, non-profit communities like EFF, Open Knowledge, and Wikipedians, and the open data, open access, library, and open education communities”
“Despite this success story, most scientific research today is not published openly — meaning freely, to everyone, without delay from the time of publication. Instead, it lives behind time embargoes and paywalls, costing as much as $35 per article to access. Even when scientific information is free to read, it is subject to copyright restrictions that prevent it from being recast quickly in new ways.”
“Lulu, a pioneer in the self-publishing market, has set its sights on a new segment: academics.
In an a release this week, Lulu announced the launch of, Glasstree, an online publishing platform dedicated to academic and scholarly authors and communities. Lulu officials say that Glasstree will provide a suite of online tools and services needed by academic authors, and will leverage technology, such as print-on-demand, to distribute their works more cost-effectively. Lulu says its service is centered on addressing some “critical pain points” in the commercial academic publishing market, such as accelerating time to market, more transparent pricing, and reversing the revenue model to allow academics and scholars to realize 70% of the profit from sales of their work.
Among Glasstree’s advertised services: support for open access, including the deposit of works in institutional repositories; Tools for bibliometric tracking, so academic authors can monitor Impact Factors, and other relevant measurements; More control over licensing options, through a partnership with Creative Commons; and access to traditional peer review….”