Gentle credit for Wiley's RightsLink page; pity they promote CC-NC

Posted on March 20, 2014 by pm286

 
I follow the #openaccess announcements on Twitter – to check licences, etc. Here’s one from Wiley and I’ve gone to the Rightslink page
wiley
 
Unlike Elsevier, where the Rightslink is often badly constructed, this is clear. It’s CC-BY, no weasel words, no attempt to link to a pricing sheet , no declaration that you have to mail the publisher, no statement that the publishers’ permission is required.
However it’s a pity that Wiley are even offering CC-NC. I thought that two years ago they were completely CC-BY. That’s the honest thing to do. You get paid a large amount of money for Open Access – you give the appropriate return.
[Sorry about the fuzziness – my wordpress is blurring pictures – have to find out why.
 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Gentle credit for Wiley's RightsLink page; pity they promote CC-NC

  1. Witold Kieńć says:
    March 21, 2014 at 12:11 pm

    I think that big part of publishers use restrictive licenses not only because they think it might be more profitable for them. T&F survey shows that authors also prefer more restrictive licensing.
    http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pdf/open-access-survey-march2013.pdf (p.9)
    Publishers react to the demand. Not every author is familiar with advantages of liberal licensing. There is a lot of work to do in this field.

    Reply
    • pm286 says:
      March 21, 2014 at 12:14 pm

      >>I think that big part of publishers use restrictive licenses not only because they think it might be more profitable for them. T&F survey shows that authors also prefer more restrictive licensing.
      No it doesn’t. It probably shows they don’t understand the issues and/or don’t care.
      >>Publishers react to the demand.
      And they also try to create markets before demand.
      >>Not every author is familiar with advantages of liberal licensing. There is a lot of work to do in this field.
      Yes – and it seems to be done by a very few volunteers. We need support.

      Reply
  2. J. Richard Snape says:
    March 26, 2014 at 3:31 pm

    That survey is interesting.
    What stood out for me are that authors are pretty much pro Open Access (with nearly all showing less than 50% against) apart from
    – giving rights to use the work for commercial gain
    – giving rights to adapt the work
    without additional permission. That’s in the first section about actual preferences.
    But then, for some reason, there is an apparent volte-face when asked to rank license options. My hunch is that many authors are so concerned about being “ripped off” that they instinctively retreat to what they already know.
    I agree with PMR that people may not understand the full implications of adaptation – but I imagine a good number of scientists are worried about misrepresentation of their results and conclusions. Also – keeping on top of the OA progress (and even understanding the license) does require some effort and Section 4 of the survey shows that only a few are actively following it.
    All in all, though, let’s keep pushing for more people to espouse OA and gradually it will become normalised. Thanks for sharing the link to the survey!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *