Hi all - as Creative Commons begins to be taken up in the context of Open Access research it feels a little like we are rehashing old arguments already had for OER. The issues are different however, especially as © is typically held by a corporate behemoth like Elsevier. I would be interested in the list's perspectives - see below and attached for some context (though I have redacted the original post).
Thanks
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for UK Research Repository Administrators [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sheppard, Nick
Sent: 28 May 2015 09:55
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Re-use of repository materials
I personally would agree that CC-BY-NC-ND is too restrictive, I'm not even sure what ND would mean in practice as the entire premise of research is surely to derive new work??
NC is also fraught with problems IMO and I would always encourage the least restrictive licence possible i.e. CC-BY (of course this isn't possible under Elsevier's policy so you may well be right the NC-ND is the more pragmatic approach but I would still argue that a repository should be encouraging less restrictive default terms where there is no restriction by 3rd party terms.)
You perhaps saw the recent post to JISC-REPOSITORIES from Kathleen Shearer that touched on this point - attached - and Harnard's riposte where he argues that it doesn't matter (also attached).
Nick
|