This is something I’m going to try and do every Friday: take a topic on OA and then try and encourage some discussion via the usual outlets (Twitter, Facebook and our own comments section below).
Today’s discussion concerns whether or not the new Creative Commons licence should get rid of proprietary licences? I mentioned my position in the previous post, but it’s probably best if you just answer the question below before reading my opinions (I don’t want to be seen as having influenced you… Assuming I have such sway ;-) ). To provide some context I’ll outline the four options available for voting in the poll:
Non-Commercial: Licensed works are free to use, share and remix with attribution, but does not permit commercial use of the original work.
No-Derivatives: Licensed works are free to use and share with attribution, but does not permit derivative works from the original.
Non-Commercial and No-Derivatives: Does not permit any commercial use or derivatives of the original work.
No Proprietary Licences: Permits all uses of original work, as long as it is attributed to the original author (Note: attribution is in all six licences which is why I’ve mentioned it).
Note that I didn’t provide all of the possible licences under Creative Commons because I wanted to focus on the proprietary licences rather than CC usage. If you’re in a dire need to be asked such a question, then you should probably head over to the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) and fill in their survey.