Changes

According to Wikipedia's definition<ref>Wikipedia, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Open_access&oldid=1014960039 Open Access]</ref>, '''Open access''' ('''OA''') is a set of principles and a range of practices through which research outputs are distributed online, free of cost or other access barriers.[1] With open access strictly defined (according to the 2001 definition), or libre open access, barriers to copying or reuse are also reduced or removed by applying an open license for copyright.[1]

According to Wikipedia's definition<ref>Wikipedia, ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Open_access&oldid=1014960039 Open Access]''</ref>, based upon Peter Suber's<ref>Wikipedia, ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Suber&oldid=1000232915 Peter Suber]''</ref> famous work<ref name="suber overview">{{Cite book |autore=Suber Peter |titolo=Open Access Overview |url=http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070519103647/http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm |archive-date=19 May 2007 |access-date=29 November 2014

|oaf = Yes}}</ref>, '''Open access''' ('''OA''') is a set of principles and a range of practices through which research outputs are distributed online, ''free of cost or other access barriers''.  

 

With open access strictly defined (according to the 2001 definition), or ''libre'' open access, barriers to copying or reuse are also reduced or removed by applying an ''open license for copyright''.  

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

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.