Difference between revisions of "BOAI/Section2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
INDEX
(→2.1) |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
*We recommend CC-BY or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work. | *We recommend CC-BY or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work. | ||
*OA repositories typically depend on permissions from others, such as authors or publishers, and are rarely in a position to require open licenses. *However, policy makers in a position to direct deposits into repositories should require open licenses, preferably CC-BY, when they can. | *OA repositories typically depend on permissions from others, such as authors or publishers, and are rarely in a position to require open licenses. *However, policy makers in a position to direct deposits into repositories should require open licenses, preferably CC-BY, when they can. | ||
| − | *OA journals are always in a position to require open licenses, yet most of them do not yet take advantage of the opportunity. We recommend CC-BY for all OA journals. | + | *OA journals are always in a position to require open licenses, yet most of them do not yet take advantage of the opportunity. |
| + | *We recommend CC-BY for all OA journals. | ||
*In developing strategy and setting priorities, we recognize that gratis access is better than priced access, libre access is better than gratis access, and libre under CC-BY or the equivalent is better than libre under more restrictive open licenses. | *In developing strategy and setting priorities, we recognize that gratis access is better than priced access, libre access is better than gratis access, and libre under CC-BY or the equivalent is better than libre under more restrictive open licenses. | ||
*We should achieve what we can when we can. | *We should achieve what we can when we can. | ||
*We should not delay achieving gratis in order to achieve libre, and we should not stop with gratis when we can achieve libre. | *We should not delay achieving gratis in order to achieve libre, and we should not stop with gratis when we can achieve libre. | ||
Revision as of 21:45, 18 September 2012
2.1
- We recommend CC-BY or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work.
- OA repositories typically depend on permissions from others, such as authors or publishers, and are rarely in a position to require open licenses. *However, policy makers in a position to direct deposits into repositories should require open licenses, preferably CC-BY, when they can.
- OA journals are always in a position to require open licenses, yet most of them do not yet take advantage of the opportunity.
- We recommend CC-BY for all OA journals.
- In developing strategy and setting priorities, we recognize that gratis access is better than priced access, libre access is better than gratis access, and libre under CC-BY or the equivalent is better than libre under more restrictive open licenses.
- We should achieve what we can when we can.
- We should not delay achieving gratis in order to achieve libre, and we should not stop with gratis when we can achieve libre.
