Creative Commons and Open Access - Revision history

Matt at 00:42, 2 March 2011

2011-03-02T00:42:23Z

CCID-tvol at 20:57, 10 November 2010

2010-11-10T20:57:57Z

CCID-tvol at 15:43, 8 October 2010

2010-10-08T15:43:03Z

CCID-tvol at 15:42, 8 October 2010

2010-10-08T15:42:39Z

CCID-tvol at 15:42, 8 October 2010

2010-10-08T15:42:05Z

CCID-tvol at 15:41, 8 October 2010

2010-10-08T15:41:54Z

CCID-tvol at 15:41, 8 October 2010

2010-10-08T15:41:43Z

CCID-tvol at 15:41, 8 October 2010

2010-10-08T15:41:19Z

CCID-tvol at 15:40, 8 October 2010

2010-10-08T15:40:45Z

CCID-tvol at 15:40, 8 October 2010

2010-10-08T15:40:25Z

@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 === Protocol for Implementing Open Access Data ===
-An important initiative for the Science Commons project at Creative Commons has been the Protocol for Implementing Open Access Data. The protocol, released in December 2007, is a set of principles designed to ensure that scientific data remains open, accessible, and interoperable. The protocol describes a situation wherein "life scientists must integrate data from across biology and chemistry to comprehend disease and discover cures, and climate change scientists must integrate data from wildly diverse disciplines to understand our current state and predict the impact of new policies." The [http://creativecommons.org/about/cc0 CC0 waiver] and [http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/1-0/ Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and License] implement the protocol. Later in 2008, Science Commons released the paper ''[http://sciencecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/freedom-to-research.pdf Freedom to Research: Keeping Scientific Data Open, Accessible, and Interoperable]''.
+An important initiative for the Science Commons project at Creative Commons has been the Protocol for Implementing Open Access Data. The protocol, released in December 2007, is a set of principles designed to ensure that scientific data remains open, accessible, and interoperable. The protocol describes a situation wherein "life scientists must integrate data from across biology and chemistry to comprehend disease and discover cures, and climate change scientists must integrate data from wildly diverse disciplines to understand our current state and predict the impact of new policies." The [http://creativecommons.org/about/cc0 CC0 public domain dedication] and [http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/1-0/ Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and License] implement the protocol. Later in 2008, Science Commons released the paper ''[http://sciencecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/freedom-to-research.pdf Freedom to Research: Keeping Scientific Data Open, Accessible, and Interoperable]''.
 === Open Access Law Program ===

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 Almost all academic faculty must publish their scholarly work in order to receive tenure at their institutions, and authors know that publishing in the most prestigious journal possible is desirable. As a result, scholarly journals find themselves wielding a disproportionate amount of power, since authors want to publish and journals are the gatekeepers. Thus, most journals require authors to transfer the copyright to them as a prerequisite to publication. In this way, publishers are then able to take advantage of the authors work by retaining exclusive rights to the publication and distribution of the work. Some authors wish to retain some rights to the academic scholarship they produce.
-An original solution to this problem began with the creation of author addenda tools--copyright transfer agreements to help authors retain the rights they need to ensure Open Access to their work. The Science Commons project at Creative Commons released the Scholar's Copyright Addendum Engine in support of the self-archiving route to Open Access. It provides a simple mechanism for scholars to retain rights over their published material that otherwise would be transferred to the publisher. The addendum engine generates a completed PDF copy of a one-page standard addendum that reserves certain rights to the author, such as the right to post a copy of the published version of the article online immediately to a site that does not charge for access to the article--for instance, the author's personal website. The engine offers four authors' addenda, and universities such as Carnegie Mellon, Johns Hopkins University and MIT have adapted the engine to meet the needs of their faculty.
+An original solution to this problem began with the creation of author addenda tools--copyright transfer agreements to help authors retain the rights they need to ensure Open Access to their work. The Science Commons project at Creative Commons released the [http://scholars.sciencecommons.org/ Scholar's Copyright Addendum Engine] in support of the self-archiving route to Open Access. It provides a simple mechanism for scholars to retain rights over their published material that otherwise would be transferred to the publisher. The addendum engine generates a completed PDF copy of a one-page standard addendum that reserves certain rights to the author, such as the right to post a copy of the published version of the article online immediately to a site that does not charge for access to the article--for instance, the author's personal website. The engine offers four authors' addenda, and universities such as Carnegie Mellon, Johns Hopkins University and MIT have adapted the engine to meet the needs of their faculty.
 Creative Commons has seen that the copyright addenda are useful as a faculty education tool, and the addenda continue to help expose some of the drawbacks to the traditional scholarly publishing process. However, as a whole, the copyright addenda approach is not as effective as other more integrated solutions. Even if individual authors wish to release their research papers Open Access, when push comes to shove, they will follow the rules of the journal publisher because they wish to be published and don't want to risk rejection by the journal over a dispute about copyright.

@@ Line 79: / Line 79: @@
 == Conclusion ==
 Creative Commons has been involved in the evolving Open Access movement over the last several year, offering useful legal tools and analysis in support of individual faculty, universities, and institutions wishing to engage in OA. As the Open Educational Resources movement grows, Creative Commons and other OER players should look to the work in the OA space and replicate best practices. OA and OER education and advocacy should support each other in their advancement toward similar goals.
 __NOEDITSECTION__

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 = Doing our homework: Science @ Creative Commons, Open Access, and Lessons for OER =
 Over the last few years, Creative Commons has been a productive convener of ideas and action within the Open Educational Resources (OER) space. As the OER community continues to grow, it is worthwhile to step back and examine a related movement in order to connect related themes, identify recurring roadblocks, and extract best practices for future work. The largely undocumented role of the Science Commons project at Creative Commons within the Open Access (OA) movement provides an interesting case study to draw lessons and suggest areas for continued action for Creative Commons and others in the OER movement.
 The Science Commons project at Creative Commons has been involved in the Open Access movement since its conception in 2005. Scholar and OA advocate Peter Suber defines Open Access  as “literature [that is] is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.” The three most widely used explanations of Open Access come from the Budapest (February 2002), Bethesda (June 2003), and Berlin (October 2003) meetings. The [http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml Budapest Open Access Declaration] describes Open Access as the freedom of users to “read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the Internet itself." The Creative Commons Attribution license--the least restrictive  license in the suite--implements the Budapest Declaration, and is widely recognized in the community as a means to make a work truly Open Access. Licenses that add restrictions beyond attribution, such as the Non-Commercial or Share-Alike provisions, do not meet the Budapest standard.

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 == History of Creative Commons in Open Access ==
-</ br>
 The Science Commons project at Creative Commons has been involved in the Open Access movement since its conception in 2005. Scholar and OA advocate Peter Suber defines Open Access  as “literature [that is] is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.” The three most widely used explanations of Open Access come from the Budapest (February 2002), Bethesda (June 2003), and Berlin (October 2003) meetings. The [http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml Budapest Open Access Declaration] describes Open Access as the freedom of users to “read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the Internet itself." The Creative Commons Attribution license--the least restrictive  license in the suite--implements the Budapest Declaration, and is widely recognized in the community as a means to make a work truly Open Access. Licenses that add restrictions beyond attribution, such as the Non-Commercial or Share-Alike provisions, do not meet the Budapest standard.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:41, 8 October 2010
Line 3:		Line 3:

	== History of Creative Commons in Open Access ==		== History of Creative Commons in Open Access ==
		+	</br>

	The Science Commons project at Creative Commons has been involved in the Open Access movement since its conception in 2005. Scholar and OA advocate Peter Suber defines Open Access as “literature [that is] is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.” The three most widely used explanations of Open Access come from the Budapest (February 2002), Bethesda (June 2003), and Berlin (October 2003) meetings. The [http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml Budapest Open Access Declaration] describes Open Access as the freedom of users to “read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the Internet itself." The Creative Commons Attribution license--the least restrictive license in the suite--implements the Budapest Declaration, and is widely recognized in the community as a means to make a work truly Open Access. Licenses that add restrictions beyond attribution, such as the Non-Commercial or Share-Alike provisions, do not meet the Budapest standard.		The Science Commons project at Creative Commons has been involved in the Open Access movement since its conception in 2005. Scholar and OA advocate Peter Suber defines Open Access as “literature [that is] is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.” The three most widely used explanations of Open Access come from the Budapest (February 2002), Bethesda (June 2003), and Berlin (October 2003) meetings. The [http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml Budapest Open Access Declaration] describes Open Access as the freedom of users to “read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the Internet itself." The Creative Commons Attribution license--the least restrictive license in the suite--implements the Budapest Declaration, and is widely recognized in the community as a means to make a work truly Open Access. Licenses that add restrictions beyond attribution, such as the Non-Commercial or Share-Alike provisions, do not meet the Budapest standard.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:40, 8 October 2010
Line 3:		Line 3:

	== History of Creative Commons in Open Access ==		== History of Creative Commons in Open Access ==
		+
	The Science Commons project at Creative Commons has been involved in the Open Access movement since its conception in 2005. Scholar and OA advocate Peter Suber defines Open Access as “literature [that is] is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.” The three most widely used explanations of Open Access come from the Budapest (February 2002), Bethesda (June 2003), and Berlin (October 2003) meetings. The [http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml Budapest Open Access Declaration] describes Open Access as the freedom of users to “read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the Internet itself." The Creative Commons Attribution license--the least restrictive license in the suite--implements the Budapest Declaration, and is widely recognized in the community as a means to make a work truly Open Access. Licenses that add restrictions beyond attribution, such as the Non-Commercial or Share-Alike provisions, do not meet the Budapest standard.		The Science Commons project at Creative Commons has been involved in the Open Access movement since its conception in 2005. Scholar and OA advocate Peter Suber defines Open Access as “literature [that is] is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.” The three most widely used explanations of Open Access come from the Budapest (February 2002), Bethesda (June 2003), and Berlin (October 2003) meetings. The [http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml Budapest Open Access Declaration] describes Open Access as the freedom of users to “read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the Internet itself." The Creative Commons Attribution license--the least restrictive license in the suite--implements the Budapest Declaration, and is widely recognized in the community as a means to make a work truly Open Access. Licenses that add restrictions beyond attribution, such as the Non-Commercial or Share-Alike provisions, do not meet the Budapest standard.

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 == Projects ==
 === Individuals Publishing Open Access Articles ===
 Almost all academic faculty must publish their scholarly work in order to receive tenure at their institutions, and authors know that publishing in the most prestigious journal possible is desirable. As a result, scholarly journals find themselves wielding a disproportionate amount of power, since authors want to publish and journals are the gatekeepers. Thus, most journals require authors to transfer the copyright to them as a prerequisite to publication. In this way, publishers are then able to take advantage of the authors work by retaining exclusive rights to the publication and distribution of the work. Some authors wish to retain some rights to the academic scholarship they produce.
@@ Line 47: / Line 48: @@
 == Strategies ==
 === Shifting Arguments ===
 The Open Access work was one of first endeavors of the Science Commons project at Creative Commons, and provided a platform from which to explore how CC licenses could be applied to the scholarly canon. The Open Access work was seen as the base for exploring other applications of CC licenses and public domain tools in data, biological materials, the semantic web, and patents.