Creative Commons licenses in
   scholarly and scientific
 publishing – an idea whose
        time has come
      Ronja Add...
Disclaimer
• The views, interpretations and opinions
  expressed in this presentation are mine
• There certainly are simil...
Presentation outline
•   Task analysis: What we researchers do
•   Requirements: What we need
•   Historical overview
•   ...
Task analysis
•     A simplified ”circle of life” of scientific-
      scholarly knowledge
    1) Researcher A publishes a...
Requirements
• The essential necessities
    – Access to previous publications
    – Visibility of own work
    – Plus a m...
Historical overview 1(3)
• Before 1886 only national laws
    – Problem: legal to print and sell e.g. a Belgian book in
  ...
Historical overview 2(3)
• 1980ies: Richard M. Stallman: Emacs, GNU
    – Problem: RMS shared source code with a friend wh...
Historical overview 3(3)
• Many other approaches; attempts to
  remedy strong copyleft’s shortcomings
• 2001 Creative Comm...
Current practices
• Scholarly and scientific publishers
    – Many require that author gives away copyright
    – Each has...
14th May 2007   Ronja Addams-Moring   10
14th May 2007   Ronja Addams-Moring   11
14th May 2007   Ronja Addams-Moring   12
Example 1(4)
• Springer, Natural Hazards (1st issue March 1988)
• “An author
    – may self-archive an author-created vers...
Example 2(4)
• Blackwell Publishing, Disasters (1st issue March 1997)
• “you may use the accepted version of the Article …...
Example 3(4)
• Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency
  Management (1st issue May 2003); semi-open
• “The following us...
Example 4(4)
• Open Medicine (1st issue 18th April 2007)
• “Open Medicine applies the Creative
  Commons Attribution NonCo...
What makes a great idea?
• It is right, because
• In case any of e.g. these apply
    – Research is done with public funds...
What makes a great idea?
• It is (often) profitable, because
• Open access to electronic versions
  boosts sales of printe...
What makes a great idea?
• It is fun! because
    1. It really annoys an established industry who
       is making a lot o...
Choosing our approach
• Why should we authorize anyone to ”hide” our
  work? (Blackwell, Elsevier & Co.)
• Why would we ag...
Which CC license(s) fit?
a) The individual researcher
b) A professional community as publisher
c) The scientific-scholarly...
My answer
• I want my work to be used & I like to get paid
• Therefore, this work is licensed under the
  Creative Commons...
What say you?
• Each of us should make her or his own copyright/left
  decisions (with co-authors, preferably before start...
See for yourself, starters
• http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/me
• Hal Abelson on MIT Open Courseware:
  http://w...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

AddamsMoring 2007 CC Licenses In Scholarly and Scientific Publishing in PDF

475 views
454 views

Published on

Why we should use Creative Commons by-nc-nd and by-nc-sa licenses in scientific-scholarly publishing - PDF format

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
475
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

AddamsMoring 2007 CC Licenses In Scholarly and Scientific Publishing in PDF

  1. 1. Creative Commons licenses in scholarly and scientific publishing – an idea whose time has come Ronja Addams-Moring ISCRAM2007 conference Round Table presentation
  2. 2. Disclaimer • The views, interpretations and opinions expressed in this presentation are mine • There certainly are similarities with some other persons' views but that is not their responsibility • Feel free to copy, distribute, criticize, ignore or form derivative opinions as you see fit  14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 2
  3. 3. Presentation outline • Task analysis: What we researchers do • Requirements: What we need • Historical overview • Current practices • Choosing our approach • Which CC license(s) fit? 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 3
  4. 4. Task analysis • A simplified ”circle of life” of scientific- scholarly knowledge 1) Researcher A publishes a new result 2) Based on A’s result, other researchers create more new knowledge 3) Researcher A uses other researchers’ results as input for more research 4) The process repeats: Body of Knowledge grows larger and better with each ”round” 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 4
  5. 5. Requirements • The essential necessities – Access to previous publications – Visibility of own work – Plus a multitude of things not addressed here • Coffee! • Equipment! • Finding the relevant previous publications! • Funding • Colleagues, students and staff • etc 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 5
  6. 6. Historical overview 1(3) • Before 1886 only national laws – Problem: legal to print and sell e.g. a Belgian book in France without author’s permission – Solution: international copyright conventions – New problem: public domain only alternative • Copyright protects the form (wording, lay-out, typography, pictures, etc) for ca. 100 years • Copyright does not protect ideas or solution principles (that’s what patents are for) 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 6
  7. 7. Historical overview 2(3) • 1980ies: Richard M. Stallman: Emacs, GNU – Problem: RMS shared source code with a friend who developed it, sold it and the buyer forbade RMS to use any of the friend’s code – Solution: GNU GPL, first copyleft license • The copyleft innovation: share-alike – The license sticks to the work and its derivatives forever (”strong copyleft”) • Limitation of strong copyleft’s social acceptability: absolute, all-in-one, no degrees, no exceptions 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 7
  8. 8. Historical overview 3(3) • Many other approaches; attempts to remedy strong copyleft’s shortcomings • 2001 Creative Commons – authors choose which rights they license • Meanwhile, the cost for university libraries of offering journals has skyrocketed – 1986-2005: +302% serial expenditures (ARL) • Economic possibilities of offering monographs are growing ever slimmer? 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 8
  9. 9. Current practices • Scholarly and scientific publishers – Many require that author gives away copyright – Each has own principles and practices – Each has own vocabulary (“dialect of legalese”)  Author must learn all or check every time what (s)he may do with own work • Creative Commons (CC) offers – Author keeps copyright, licenses work to users – Standardized vocabulary & ready-made legal jargon – Well-known ”brand” – Easy enough user interface for author and user 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 9
  10. 10. 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 10
  11. 11. 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 11
  12. 12. 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 12
  13. 13. Example 1(4) • Springer, Natural Hazards (1st issue March 1988) • “An author – may self-archive an author-created version of his/her article on his/her own website and his/her institution's repository, including his/her final version; – …may not use the publisher's PDF version which is posted on www.springerlink.com. Furthermore, the author may only post his/her version – provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: quot;The original publication is available at www.springerlink.comquot;.” 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 13
  14. 14. Example 2(4) • Blackwell Publishing, Disasters (1st issue March 1997) • “you may use the accepted version of the Article … updated … after peer review… – you may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues; – you may use all or part of the Article and abstract, without revision or modification, in personal compilations or other publications of your own work; – you may use the Article within your employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs; – 24 months after publication you may post an electronic version of the Article on your own personal website, on your employer’s website/repository and on free public servers in your subject area.” 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 14
  15. 15. Example 3(4) • Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (1st issue May 2003); semi-open • “The following uses are always permitted to the author(s) ... provided … does not alter the articles …: – Storage and back-up of the article … provided that the article … is not readily accessible by persons other than the author(s); – Posting of the article on the author(s) personal website, provided that the website is non-commercial; – Posting of the article on the internet as part of a non- commercial open access institutional repository or other non-commercial open access publication site affiliated with the author(s)'s place of employment …; – Posting of the article on a non-commercial course website for a course being taught by the author at the university or college employing the author.” 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 15
  16. 16. Example 4(4) • Open Medicine (1st issue 18th April 2007) • “Open Medicine applies the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike License … • because … there should be no financial barriers to access to information that can benefit medical practice. … authors should retain copyright to the article they have worked so hard to produce.” 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 16
  17. 17. What makes a great idea? • It is right, because • In case any of e.g. these apply – Research is done with public funds – The results influences public spending – Research addresses the well-being of the general public (medicine, social psychology, political science, ISCRAM…) • Then that research should be fully public – Available to be freely utilized – Open to critical comments from all 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 17
  18. 18. What makes a great idea? • It is (often) profitable, because • Open access to electronic versions boosts sales of printed versions (National Academic Press, since 1994) • Open access -> higher impact (JHSEM) • Problem: funding of some academic societies • One solution: HTML is free, small(ish) sum for ”neater” PDF (Amer. Scientist) 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 18
  19. 19. What makes a great idea? • It is fun! because 1. It really annoys an established industry who is making a lot of money 2. It’s legal 3. It gets you excited to get out of bed every morning • John Buckman (2007) How to piss off the Music Industry for Fun and Profit. PDF via: http://blogs.magnatune.com/buckman/2007/05/how_t 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 19
  20. 20. Choosing our approach • Why should we authorize anyone to ”hide” our work? (Blackwell, Elsevier & Co.) • Why would we agree to keep track of N different copyright systems? • Why would we pay or work extra to make our work fully public? (Kluver, ACM & Co.) • Why do we require reader identification? (ISCRAM, JHSEM & Co.) • What else needs to be considered? 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 20
  21. 21. Which CC license(s) fit? a) The individual researcher b) A professional community as publisher c) The scientific-scholarly community • Attribution (by) – always included • NonCommercial (nc) – smart, realistic • ShareAlike (sa) or NoDerivatives (nd) – that is the question 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 21
  22. 22. My answer • I want my work to be used & I like to get paid • Therefore, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons license Attribution Non- Commercial ShareAlike 3.0 Unported – Attribution form: Ronja Addams-Moring (2007) ”Creative Commons licenses in scholarly and scientific publishing – an idea whose time has come”. Round Table presentation 14th May at the ISCRAM2007 conference, Delft, NL, EU. – The license terms are available via: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/deed.en 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 22
  23. 23. What say you? • Each of us should make her or his own copyright/left decisions (with co-authors, preferably before starting) • Our decisions should be documented in such a manner that others can easily understand them: therefore CC?  ISCRAM conferences may need two CC licenses in the future: by+nc for all, plus a choise: sa or nd • Thank you for your time! Let’s talk more during these conference days. • http://www.iki.fi/~ronja/ • http://no-fate-but-what-we-make.blogspot.com/ • ronja [at] iki [dot] fi ; skype: ronja-am 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 23
  24. 24. See for yourself, starters • http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/me • Hal Abelson on MIT Open Courseware: http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/hicss_40/Abelson • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft • Ethical background: Steven Levy (1984) Hackers. Dell Publishing, New York, NY, USA. ISBN: 0-440-13405-6. 14th May 2007 Ronja Addams-Moring 24

×