From: <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 05:41:02 +0000

I'm not trying to blame anyone or anything. CC licenses are new and as
with many new things, there will be unforeseen situations that could
show areas where improvements might be needed. In this case, all I'm
pointing to is that a -BY license could lead to situations where a
rights holder may not be happy with their choice. I put forward this
example simply to help the process of evolution and improvement along.

As for this particular case, I don't think it is fair to imply we
abdicated any responsibility - we published the work at UNESCO's
request and at a financial loss. I could have decided not to publish
the work, but UNESCO did not have the means and, as the other
Paris-based IGO, I felt we should help out.

I'm glad you like what we do - I appreciate that.

Toby Green
Head of Publishing
OECD


> On 4 Jun 2015, at 04:07, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Eric Hellman <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 22:34:47 -0400
>
> So instead of taking responsibility for OECD's choice of workflow, you
> blame OECD's clients' choice of license.
>
> Imputing "reputational risk" to Creative Commons licensing Is just
> abdicating the value that a publisher can add.
>
> I mostly love what OECD does, but here we diverge.
>
>
>> On Jun 2, 2015, at 6:38 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> From: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 05:29:46 +0000
>>
>> With respect to Eric's comments that OECD could have done a good
>> Kindle edition ourselves, we could have except that that would have
>> increased our costs (because we do not have Kindle editions in our
>> existing workflow) and we were already in a situation where the
>> available funding to offset publishing costs was inadequate. (Ensuring
>> adequate funding for Gold OA is the key challenge. Without that, it
>> frankly doesn't matter what the license is because the work won't
>> exist.) The point I was trying to make is that using a -BY licence
>> increases the reputational risk for the rights-holder should the work
>> be transformed, converted or re-used. Granted, the risk is small, but
>> it is there.
>>
>> Toby Green
>> Head of Publishing
>> OECD