This is the last post I shall make – on this blog – on this subject.
Recent discussion has highlighted that this issue is much larger and much more critical than I thought even a few days ago. It is critical that we assemble clear dispassionate arguments to show overwhelming that CC-NC is totally incompatible with “Open Access” publishing and to persuade funders and publishers to move as rapidly as possible to a fully Open (Open Definition) licence. I am therefore taking this to the discussion group(s) of the Open Knowledge Foundation (http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss ) where it will have a wider audience and more informed comment.
Ross Mounce has put together a number of comments, the first of which states
“i.e. this mess has caused irreparable damage to the re-usability of the literature.”
I completely agree with this – and every month that it remains makes the future of Open Scholarly publishing worse. You can read all the comments but here are some which discuss the issue:
/pmr/2011/12/06/acceptance-of-cc-nc-has-sold-readers-and-authors-seriously-short/#comment-101293 (Richard Kidd, Royal Society of Chemistry)
Anecdotal surveys in the comments by Daniel, Ross and PMR show that a very high proportion of well-known publishers are using CC-NC.