Changes

Following a collective reflection among the founding members of [[the Charity]], in [[Masticationpedia]] we do not consider belonging to the so-called '''Open Access''' all those licenses which, even if related to Creative Commons deeds, impose limits of the freedom of circulation and sharing of scientific works.

Following a collective reflection among the founding members of [[the Charity]], in [[Masticationpedia]] we do not consider belonging to the so-called '''Open Access''' all those licenses which, even if related to Creative Commons deeds, impose limitations toithe freedom of circulation and sharing of scientific works.

For instance, we do not recognise as '''Open Access''' those licenses which include "NC" (non commercial) and/or "ND" (no derivative works) and/or similar clauses.

For instance, we do not recognise as '''Open Access''' those licenses which include "NC" (non commercial) and/or "ND" (no derivative works) and/or similar clauses.

Whatever the consideration they might obtain in other contexts, in Masticationpedia licenses such as "CC BY-NC", "CC BY-ND", "CC BY-NC-ND" and similar are ''not'' considered as '''Open Access'''.

Whatever the consideration they might obtain in other contexts, in Masticationpedia licenses such as "CC BY-NC", "CC BY-ND", "CC BY-NC-ND" and similar are ''not'' considered as '''Open Access'''. Yes, from a formal point of view you are free to read them, to ''access'' them, but the very concept of "Open" includes the rights to be able to use the works without limitation.

[[Category:Copyright]]

[[Category:Copyright]]