LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 23 Jan 2012 22:12:56 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (62 lines)
From: marciano matiyas <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 03:05:12 -0800

Free in the context of Africa where funding is not available should
mean zero priced.

***

From: LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
From: John Houghton <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:47:26 +1100

I guess it depends what you mean by 'free'. The term is ambiguous.

*Do you mean free, as in zero priced? Obviously, nothing is free in
the sense of zero cost.

*Do you mean free, as in free to use for research and/or commercial purposes?

*Do you mean free, as in free to cite with or without attribution?

*Do you mean free, as in allowing copies to be made for the purpose of
indexing (e.g. so it can be 'Googled"), for which many countries do
not have copyright exceptions or fair use provisions?

*Do you mean free, as in free to re-use, such as in re-mix, with or
without attribution?

*Do you mean free, as in free to text mine with or without attribution
(attribution is pretty impractical in text mining)?

*Do you mean free, as in free to copy and (re)distribute?

I suspect we have agreed, standard definitions of OA and CC licensing
so we know what 'free' means and exactly what we can do with things
that are zero priced. As ever, the issue is the value not the price.
What is the point of something being free (zero priced) if you can't
use it for your, or its intended purpose? The problem with toll access
publishing is that it prevents many valuable forms of use in order to
maintain the toll booth.

John Houghton


On 18/01/2012 9:42 AM, LIBLICENSE wrote:

From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:50:39 -0800

All I have said is that the term is ambiguous.  When I use it, I
define it in context.  I use it to mean free, and nothing more.  If
someone would say "Budapest OA" or "Bethesda OA" or "Santa Claus OA"
or whatever, with clear definitions backing these terms up, I would
use them as defined.

The amusing thing about this is that some advocates of OA seem to
believe that there is a consensus where there is none. It really does
point to the insularity of the OA movement.  Perhaps they should all
get out more.

Joe Esposito

ATOM RSS1 RSS2