Editor, Editors, USER, admin, Bureaucrats, Check users, dev, editor, Interface administrators, lookupuser, oversight, push-subscription-manager, Suppressors, Administrators, translator, widgeteditor
17,894
edits
Changes
Masticationpedia:Open Access licenses (view source)
Revision as of 12:34, 30 March 2021
, 4 years agono edit summary
[[File:Open Access logo green alt2.svg|160px|right|Open Access]]
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''.
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.
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''<ref name="suber overview" />.
Following a collective reflection among the founding members of [[the Charity]], with the '''Budapest Open Access Initiative'''<ref>[https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read Budapest Open Access Initiative]<br>{{OAref}}</ref> in our minds and in our heart, 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.
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.
{{Bib}}
[[Category:Copyright]]
[[Category:Copyright]]