Some time ago, UNESCO released a very interesting study on Open Access – its brief history, objectives, methods of publication; the benefits of OA, and the development strategies for the model. It is worth taking a closer look at this publication, since it contains some very useful information.
Some time ago Social Science Space published an article by Robert Dingwall daringly entitled “Why Open Access is Good News for Neo-Nazis”, where the author spoke about Open Access in the same breath as about Nazis. So let’s check: are his theories valid in a way?
As it currently stands, the battle for Open Access is in full swing on some fronts: no better is this exemplified than in the growing number of Open Access Journals. Still, whereas journals and articles are undergoing transition, little has been said on academic books. There’s some irony here given the successes of Project Gutenberg, Google Books and, more recently, Amazon’s Kindle and Apple’s iPad. Numerous reasons have been levelled as to why academic books seem to be bucking the trend: ranging from the exorbitant prices of production and editing expenses at book-level to reading preferences for print books over […]
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 […]
With the Creative Commons 4.0 licence just on the horizon, there have been some questions raised about the use of proprietary licences. Perhaps the most comprehensive trashing comes from the freeculture.org article Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0. Their main gripe with CC is the use of NonCommercial (NC) and NoDerivatives (ND): Neither of them provide better protection against misappropriation than free culture licenses. The ND clause survives on the idea that rightsholders would not otherwise be able protect their reputation or preserve the integrity of their work, but all these fears about allowing derivatives are either permitted […]