Comments on: Why I am disappointed with Nature Communications http://cameronneylon.net/blog/why-i-am-disappointed-with-nature-communications/ The online home of Cameron Neylon Fri, 13 Jan 2012 08:26:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Cameron Neylon http://cameronneylon.net/blog/why-i-am-disappointed-with-nature-communications/comment-page-1/#comment-3777 Cameron Neylon Thu, 28 Jan 2010 08:12:55 +0000 http://cameronneylon.net/?p=772#comment-3777 Andy, from a business perspective it is not unreasonable for a publisher to try and maintain exclusivity any more than you would expect any business to try and avoid becoming a monopoly player. But from the perspective of creating and protecting a knowledge commons any limitations on rights to use and re-use are extremely problematic. As soon as you try to limit types of or classes of re-use you have split the commons. This is why, amongst any other disagreements, Science Commons and Open Knowledge Foundation agree strongly that non-commercial terms are so dangerous. The consequences are difficult to predict precisely but you can be confident that they will limit the ability of entrepreneurs, as well as incumbent businesses, to develop new forms of business models. <br><br>More complex licences are the last thing we need. No-one understands non-commercial terms as it is, make them more granular and no-one will be happy except the lawyers. None of which should be taken as saying that NPG don't have a perfect right to do whatever they please to protect their business. I just think the approach is misguided from a long term business perspective, and not compatible with the mission of an organisation that holds the advancement of scientific communication at its heart. Andy, from a business perspective it is not unreasonable for a publisher to try and maintain exclusivity any more than you would expect any business to try and avoid becoming a monopoly player. But from the perspective of creating and protecting a knowledge commons any limitations on rights to use and re-use are extremely problematic. As soon as you try to limit types of or classes of re-use you have split the commons. This is why, amongst any other disagreements, Science Commons and Open Knowledge Foundation agree strongly that non-commercial terms are so dangerous. The consequences are difficult to predict precisely but you can be confident that they will limit the ability of entrepreneurs, as well as incumbent businesses, to develop new forms of business models.

More complex licences are the last thing we need. No-one understands non-commercial terms as it is, make them more granular and no-one will be happy except the lawyers. None of which should be taken as saying that NPG don't have a perfect right to do whatever they please to protect their business. I just think the approach is misguided from a long term business perspective, and not compatible with the mission of an organisation that holds the advancement of scientific communication at its heart.

]]> By: Andy Powell http://cameronneylon.net/blog/why-i-am-disappointed-with-nature-communications/comment-page-1/#comment-3772 Andy Powell Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:04:25 +0000 http://cameronneylon.net/?p=772#comment-3772 I wonder if there's a granularity issue here (from the perspective of NPG)?<br><br>What we want (as scholars), I think, is that researchers can take individual articles and use them under the terms of BBB open access (i.e. that a NC restriction should not apply).<br><br>However, I don't consider it unreasonable for NPG to try and take steps to prevent the wholesale consumption of a large collection of their articles being used to set up a commercially competitive alternative to their overall offering.<br><br>In that sense, I think there are similar issues here to those with the licences that OCLC tried to assert on their library catalogue (WorldCat) records.<br><br>What CC offers us, a simple C vs NC divide, is perhaps too simplistic?? I wonder if there's a granularity issue here (from the perspective of NPG)?

What we want (as scholars), I think, is that researchers can take individual articles and use them under the terms of BBB open access (i.e. that a NC restriction should not apply).

However, I don't consider it unreasonable for NPG to try and take steps to prevent the wholesale consumption of a large collection of their articles being used to set up a commercially competitive alternative to their overall offering.

In that sense, I think there are similar issues here to those with the licences that OCLC tried to assert on their library catalogue (WorldCat) records.

What CC offers us, a simple C vs NC divide, is perhaps too simplistic??

]]> By: Maurice Ruiz http://cameronneylon.net/blog/why-i-am-disappointed-with-nature-communications/comment-page-1/#comment-3769 Maurice Ruiz Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:44:18 +0000 http://cameronneylon.net/?p=772#comment-3769 You really neaten it seem so unchaste with your show but I learn this issue to be truly something which I opine I would never realise. It seems too complicated and really encompassing for me. I am hunt gardant for your succeeding post, I will try to get the grasp of it!<br><br><a href="http://www.Mod-Express.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.Mod-Express.com</a> You really neaten it seem so unchaste with your show but I learn this issue to be truly something which I opine I would never realise. It seems too complicated and really encompassing for me. I am hunt gardant for your succeeding post, I will try to get the grasp of it!

http://www.Mod-Express.com

]]> By: John Marker http://cameronneylon.net/blog/why-i-am-disappointed-with-nature-communications/comment-page-1/#comment-3766 John Marker Tue, 26 Jan 2010 16:51:36 +0000 http://cameronneylon.net/?p=772#comment-3766 Thers is not reason to be disappointed ?<br><br><a href="http://free-acai-berry" rel="nofollow">http://free-acai-berry</a> trials.info Thers is not reason to be disappointed ?

http://free-acai-berry trials.info

]]> By: Mike http://cameronneylon.net/blog/why-i-am-disappointed-with-nature-communications/comment-page-1/#comment-3767 Mike Tue, 26 Jan 2010 16:46:22 +0000 http://cameronneylon.net/?p=772#comment-3767 Thanks very much<br><br>nice to see you here! hope to hear from you! Thanks very much

nice to see you here! hope to hear from you!

]]>