From: Heather Morrison <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 13:31:00 -0700

My post critiquing this portion of the survey is now complete.

Summary

This portion of the T&F OA survey supports arguments that scholars as
a group do not support the Creative Commons - Attribution Only license
(CC-BY), but rather when using CC licenses tend to prefer more
restrictive licenses, with CC-Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives
(CC-BY-NC-ND) being the most popular option. There was strong support
for text and data mining. There was an interesting difference in
reaction to pre-approving translations (largely positive) and
adapations as a whole (largely negative), suggesting the possibility
of a more nuanced approach such as ND with preapproval of translations
outside the CC license per se. Attribution is taken as a given;
further research into the question of attribution might be merited as
attribution may not be advisable in the case of research data and the
norms for attribution can vary, for example with scholarship and
Wikipedia. This portion of the survey indicates support for Taylor and
Francis traditional practices (Exclusive License to Publish and
Copyright Transfer), which is not surprising considering the survey
pool (scholars connected with T&F) and high probability of bias in
these responses.

For details see the full post:

http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.ca/2013/04/attitudes-and-values-regarding.html

best,

Heather G. Morrison