<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On 2012-05-09, at 7:34 AM, Andras Holl wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<meta content="OPENWEBMAIL" name="GENERATOR">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size="2">The thing whether Open Access relates to an individual article
<br>or a whole journal is not clear. </font></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Individual article (and author)</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size="2">Does libre OA mean that anyone
<br>is free to redistribute the whole journal, or only one, a few article?
<br></font></div></blockquote><div><br></div>There can be libre OA by the article (green libre OA or</div><div>hybrid Gold OA) or by the journal (Gold OA).</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size="2">Text mining rights are meaningful only for the whole journal.
<br></font></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Perhaps.</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size="2">My opinion that they should be granted</font></div></blockquote><div><br></div>By whom: The publisher or the author? And how is</div><div>the author to grant them if the publisher does not?</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size="2"> - the problem I have
<br>is not with the rights. It is with the practice. The OA journal
<br>I manage has every article available in several formats - LaTeX, PS. PDF, HTML -
<br>some of these are generated on-the-fly, some static. Indiscriminate
<br>harvesting is a prolem for me. What I would like to have is
<br>some method, which is a mix of robots.txt and htaccess,
<br>maybe with a touch of legal content about the scope of
<br>possible use of harvested content.
<br></font></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Yes, all in good time.</div><div><br></div><div>But what we need now is the Green Gratis OA that</div><div>is within reach of institutional and funder mandates,</div><div>for *all* articles, in *all* journals.</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size="2">So, in my opinion, the real worls situation is even more complex
<br>than either gratis or libre. There are many flavors of OA, and
<br>I do not think that sticking to the bOAI definition would do much good.
<br></font></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Perhaps a better way of putting it is that there are several</div><div>degrees of OA, and first things first: We should reach for</div><div>the "low bar" Gratis Green OA that is already within our grasp,</div><div>by mandating it, rather than insisting on more and getting</div><div>next to nothing,</div><div><br></div><div>That will prepare the way for the further degrees,</div><div><br></div><div>Stevan Harnad</div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size="2">
<br>Andras Holl
<br>
<br><b>On Wed, 9 May 2012 06:37:55 -0400, Stevan Harnad wrote</b>
<br>> **
Cross-Posted **
<br>>
<br>> On 2012-05-09, at 4:12 AM, Jan Velterop
wrote:
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<br>> I
would favour doing away with both the terms 'libre OA' and 'gratis
OA'.</blockquote><blockquote type="cite">
<br>> Open Access suffices. It's the
'open' that says it all. Especially if it is made</blockquote><blockquote type="cite">
<br>> clear that OA means BOAI-compliant OA in the context of
scholarly</blockquote><blockquote type="cite">
<br>> research
literature.</blockquote>
<br>>
<br>> I don't doubt that Jan would like to
do away with the terms libre and gratis OA.
<br>> He has been arguing
all along that free online access is not open access,
<br>> ever since 2003 on
the American Scientist Open Access Forum:
<br>>
<br>> <a href="http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/subject.html#msg6478">http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/subject.html#msg6478</a>
<br>>
<br>> This would mean that my "subversive proposal" of 1994 was not
really a
<br>> proposal for open access and that the existing
open access mandates
<br>> and policies of funders and institutions
worldwide are not really open access
<br>> mandates or policies.
<br>>
<a href="http://roarmap.eprints.org/">http://roarmap.eprints.org/</a>
<br>>
<br>> It is in large part for this reason that in 2008 Peter Suber and I
proposed
<br>> the terms "gratis" and "libre" open access to ensure
that the term
<br>> "open access" retained its meaning, and to make explicit
the two
<br>> distinct conditions involved: free online access (gratis
OA) and
<br>> certain re-use rights (libre OA):
<br>>
<br>> <a href="http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2008/04/strong-and-weak-oa.html">http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2008/04/strong-and-weak-oa.html</a>
<br>>
<br>> For Peter Murray-Rust's crusade for journal article text-mining
rights,
<br>> apart from reiterating my full agreement that these are highly
important
<br>> and highly desirable and even urgent in certain fields, I
would like
<br>> to note that -- as PM-R has stated -- neither gratis OA nor
libre OA
<br>> is necessary for the kinds of text-mining rights he is seeking.
They
<br>> can be had via a special licensing agreement from the
publisher.
<br>>
<br>> There is no ambiguity there: The text-mining rights
can be granted
<br>> even if the articles themselves are not made openly
accessible,
<br>> free for all.
<br>>
<br>> And, as Richard Poynder
has just pointed out, publishers are
<br>> quite aware of (perhaps even
relieved with) this option, with
<br>> Elsevier lately launching an
experiment in it:
<br>>
<br>> <a href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/2012-May/000433.html">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/2012-May/000433.html</a>
<br>>
<br>> This makes it clear that the text-mining rights PM-R seeks can
be
<br>> had without either sort of OA, gratis or libre...
<br>>
<br>>
Let us hope the quest for Open Access itself is not derailed in this
<br>>
direction.
<br>>
<br>> Stevan Harnad
<br>
<br>
<br>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
Andras Holl / Holl Andras
e-mail: <a href="mailto:holl@konkoly.hu">holl@konkoly.hu</a>
<br>
Konkoly Observatory / MTA CsFK CsI Tel.: +36 1 3919368 Fax:
+36 1 2754668
<br>
IT manager / Szamitastechn. rendszervez. Mail: H1525 POBox 67, Budapest, Hungary
<br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
<br></font>
</div>
<br>-- <br>To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:<br><a href="http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f">http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f</a><br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>