18 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2021
    1. The Rights Retention Strategy ignores long-standing academic freedoms

      It’s not entirely clear what is meant by this statement. This is incredibly inflammatory rhetoric for most academics who take academic freedom very seriously - for very good reasons. However, the academic has the freedom not to accept a grant if they fundamentally disagree with the funder’s desired approach to effective dissemination of the research they support. Furthermore, the rights retention strategy (RRS) is in place to give the authors more freedom of choice over what happens to the version of record (VoR). Because of the RRS, the author can submit to the most appropriate journal for the research regardless of whether it explicitly provides a compliant route to publication (assuming the journal takes the submission forwards) or whether or not the author can access funds to pay a publication charge (APC) in a hybrid subscription journal.

  2. Dec 2020
  3. Nov 2020
  4. Jul 2020
    1. This isn’t an accident. OpenOffice’s sidebar code was copied and incorporated into LibreOffice. The Apache OpenOffice project uses the Apache License, while the LibreOffice uses a dual LGPLv3 / MPL license. The practical result is LibreOffice can take OpenOffice’s code and incorporate it into LibreOffice — the licenses are compatible. On the other hand, LibreOffice has some features — like font embedding — that don’t appear in OpenOffice. This is because the two different licenses only allow a one-way transfer of code. LibreOffice can incorporate OpenOffice’s code, but OpenOffice can’t incorporate LibreOffice’s code. This is the result of the different licenses the projects chose.

      What part of LGPLv3 / MPL prevents LibreOffice code from being incorporated back into OpenOffice's Apache Licensed code??

  5. Apr 2020
    1. To read all of the license deeds, or legal codes, visit this site and explore the different licenses. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/

      An excellent resource directly from the Creative Commons site describing the rationale of use, "three-layer" design, license types, and their specific permissions/restrictions. This is a go-to resource before and after completing this course. There is no better documentation for this topic on the internet.

  6. Dec 2019
  7. Nov 2019
  8. Aug 2019
    1. http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/329

      I found this blog post by David Wiley very honest and interesting, seeing as though we didn’t talk about ‘before Creative Commons’ at all in this course. While we most likely don’t have time in the course and didn’t really need to talk about the before CC, it’s really intriguing to see that people were talking about the foundations of CC already back in 1998 and that the bones of CC were already there.

  9. Dec 2018
    1. User rights Every CC licence allows you to: Copy the work (eg. download, upload, photocopy and scan the work); Distribute the work (eg. provide copies of the work to teachers, students, parents and the community); Display or perform the work (eg. play a sound recording or film in class, or stage a play to parents); Communicate the work (eg. make the work available online on the school intranet, learning management system or on a class blog); and Format shift verbatim copies of the work (eg copy a MP3 version of music onto a CD or an MP4 version of a film onto a DVD to play in class). Source: Adapted from 'Baseline Rights'  http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Baseline_Rights   Some CC licences also let you make other uses, however these are the base user rights provided for all CC material. User obligations When you use any CC material, you must: always attribute the creator of the work (for information on how to attribute a work, see information guide, ‘How to Attribute Creative Commons Material’); get permission from the creator to do anything that goes beyond the terms of the licence (e.g. making a commercial use of the work or creating a derivative work where the licence does not permit this); keep any copyright notice attached to the work intact on all copies of the work; indicate and link to the licence from any copies of the work; and where you make changes to the work, acknowledge the original work and indicate that changes have been made (eg by stating ‘This is a French translation of the original work, X’).   In addition, when you use any CC material, you must not:  alter the terms of the licence; use the work in any way that is prejudicial to the reputation of the creator of the work; imply that the creator is endorsing or sponsoring you or your work; or add any technologies (such as digital rights management) to the work that restrict other people from using it under the terms of the licence. Source:  Adapted from 'Baseline Rights'  http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Baseline_Rights 

      This clear description of the rights conferred by every Creative Commons license and the limitations written into every Creative Commons license provides a clear overview for educators who may be new to Creative Commons licenses. This guide was developed for Australian educators specifically.

  10. Nov 2017
  11. Oct 2017
    1. This was in part because of the considerable time that it took WWARN secretariat staff to persuade Oxford University lawyers that seven pages of often arcane legal language could be streamlined into a three-page document in plain English, understandable to malaria researchers worldwide.

      And even those three pages use non-standard terms, which requires more lawyers to assess the compatibility of these terms with those of any other database one might wish to combine with WWARN data.

  12. Jan 2014
    1. The project will develop an analysis package in the open-source language R and complement it with a step-by-step hands-on manual to make tools available to a broad, international user community that includes academics, scientists working for governments and non-governmental organizations, and professionals directly engaged in conservation practice and land management. The software package will be made publicly available under http://www.clfs.umd.edu/biology/faganlab/movement/.

      Output of the project:

      • analysis package written in R
      • step-by-step hands-on manual
      • make tools available to a broad, international community
      • software made publicly available

      Question: What software license will be used? The Apache software license is potentially a good choice here because it is a strong open source license supported by a wide range of communities with few obligations or barriers to access/use which supports the goal of a broad international audience.

      Question: Will the data be made available under a license, as well? Maybe a CC license of some sort?

    1. But like the original authors, JSTOR had to negotiate its licensing agreements from a position of weakness. There is a wonderful history of JSTOR written by Roger C. Schonfeld. In it he notes that the charter publishers signed up by JSTOR (in particular the University of Chicago Press) demanded that they be compensated if there was a loss to their (minimal) sales of rights to older materials, and they demanded compensation even before JSTOR covered its own expenses.