At the recent PSP conference there was a panel on the cost of complying with the many new open access mandates from funding bodies. The panel explored the cost of compliance and how to reduce those costs. The current regulatory regime is complicated and administratively expensive, but the mandates will continue to be promulgated because the people calling for them are not the ones that have to implement them.
Even open access advocates should support the commercialization of materials that are OA, as such commercialization can lead to enhanced discovery of scientific materials.
A recent non-controversy once again shows how much confusion exists around what exactly Creative Commons licenses actually mean.
The Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) meeting in Europe is 10 years old, but feels as fresh and frisky as some of the meetings in the US used to. This report touches on some of the most interesting threads of two days’ worth of interesting presentations and conversations.
Flickr users were enraged when the company tried to reuse their CC BY licensed photographs by selling prints. This once again points out the confusion that content creators have regarding copyright and what the various CC licenses really mean.
Axiomatically more complicated than copyright, built to provide no legal cover, and possibly put in place by the technocrats in Silicon Valley, does Creative Commons make sense for the creative class?
Publishers are always said to be slow-moving, but the pace of development at the CHORUS organization belies that.
What is the role of the Copyright Clearance Center in a digital age?
An interview with MIke Rossner, former Director of Rockefeller University Press.
Eighteen years ago, Mosaic ushered in the potential for a sea-change in publishing based on technological prowess and scale. Today, the “open” label covers a set of disparate incentives under a single blanket, one that funders, government, and technology companies are all under, each for its own reason.
The CC-BY license is assumed to be an open access standard, but the situation is complex — for funders, authors, universities, and publishers of all types. Perhaps a less dogmatic approach would serve all parties better.
A fundamental confusion between articles and data leads to a call for more CC licenses and less copyright. But why are data being closed down while articles are being opened up? Is there a fundamental misunderstanding of copyright, licensing, and rights?
A recent book tells the story of how technology companies — in the guise of advocates of “open” — have gutted content and culture businesses and the creative ranks that depend on them.
An interview about open access, funding of science, publishable works, profit motives, and other topics of interest, with one of the more thoughtful advocates of OA publishing, Cameron Neylon.
More tired OA rhetoric, this time wielding an argument that copyright approaches of some OA publishers aren’t pure enough to qualify as “real” open access. Get ready to feel the burn.