<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Jan Velterop <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:velterop@gmail.com" target="_blank">velterop@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">Jeffrey,<div><br></div><div>All research articles in BMC journals are OA, BOAI-compliant CC-BY. A few journals (six of them, to be precise, <a href="http://arthritis-research.com/" target="_blank">http://arthritis-research.com/</a> , <a href="http://breast-cancer-research.com/" target="_blank">http://breast-cancer-research.com/</a>, <a href="http://ccforum.com/" target="_blank">http://ccforum.com/</a> ,<a href="http://genomebiology.com/" target="_blank">http://genomebiology.com/</a> , <a href="http://genomemedicine.com/" target="_blank">http://genomemedicine.com/</a> , and <a href="http://stemcellres.com/" target="_blank">http://stemcellres.com/</a> ) contain non-research articles, e.g. commissioned Reviews, Commentaries, Meeting reports, Viewpoints, and those articles – only those – are subject to a subscription charge.<div>
<br></div><div>Jan</div><div><br></div><br clear="all"></div></div></blockquote><div>Thanks both of you,<br>This is a good illustration that Open Content Mining does not necessarily all of the lierature to be fully CC-BY. It requires clear labelling of the subset that is BOAI-compliant. There is enough material - I believe - in BMC and PLoS papers to develop some useful science. And the toll-access journals will miss out on the citations. <br>
</div></div><br>This is the problem with UK/PMC (as Casey Bergman and others have pointed out) - it is difficult to find the content that is minable other than BMC and PLoS.<br><br>P.<br><br>-- <br>Peter Murray-Rust<br>Reader in Molecular Informatics<br>
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry<br>University of Cambridge<br>CB2 1EW, UK<br>+44-1223-763069<br>