[GOAL] Re: CC-BY: the wrong goal for open access, and neither necessary nor sufficient for data and text mining

[Heather Morrison]

On 2012-10-09, at 1:13 PM, Couture Marc wrote in response to this comment of mine:


... are researchers telling human research subjects that their contributions may be given 
on a blanket basis for third parties to sell? I would argue that CC-BY, where human 
subjects are involved, will frequently be in violation of research ethics.

Marc's words:

That's a broad stretch! I happen to sit on a research ethics committee, and if participants to a research are normally informed that the results will be published, they are never given any information about specific venues.

Maybe participants could be asked if they allow money (or profit) be made with the publication of the results of the research in with they contribute. Personally, I would find it unnecessary, from an ethics perspective. And think of it: if participants objected, it would mean no publication not only in journals using CC-BY, but in ANY journal which could be considered commercial, i.e. receives money from subscribers or authors.

By the way, this raises the question of the somewhat fuzzy meaning of a term like "non commercial", but we may come to this later, in a discussion of the NC and ND options of CC licences.

My comment:

Traditional scholarly publication, even in journals that use advertising, is a very different matter than giving blanket permission to any third party for commercial uses and derivatives. If a research subject allows their picture to be used assuming that it will appear in a medical journal, one should not assume that they have given permission for someone who sells medical devices to use their picture to advertise their wares, for example. Nor does it mean that the subject has given permission for their picture to be sold in istock for whoever has the cash to use in advertising. There are issues here of both moral and economic rights - by custom, models for commercial are paid. If people choose to give away their pictures for this purpose (the norm with facebook, for example), that is one thing. But if a scholarly researcher or funder makes this decision for them, especially without informing them and asking for permission, that is a different matter altogether.

[Marc and Ross have made other points about the legality of sharing documents under Canadian fair dealing - this is a topic that may be of interest to some, but not one that I wish to pursue at this time].

best,

Heather Morrison