[GOAL] Re: Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu

[Graham Triggs]

On 9 December 2013 00:20, Heather Morrison <Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca>wrote:

> Alicia,
>
> According to your statement below, with CC-BY the only restriction placed
> by Elsevier is for attribution. However, the Elsevier open access license
> policy clearly states that Elsevier demands an exclusive license to publish
> with open access works (including CC-BY). Can you explain this discrepancy?
>

I don't believe this is a discrepancy. What it is saying that the
definitive record is published by Elsevier, and the author provides an
exclusive licence in order to do so.

Re-publishing, or re-distributing via any other venue constitutes a
derivative work, which is permissible and does not conflict with the
exclusive licence (which is only on the definitive record, not the
derivative) - providing the proper attribution is in place.

Without the exclusive licence to the definitive record, then as the author
retains copyright, then in theory the author could authorize publishing of
a version of the definitive record without attribution to the Elsevier
version.

It's a question of preserving the version of record. The difference between
the author providing a licence to Elsevier to distribute an article under
CC-BY, and the author providing a CC-BY licence to Elsevier.

Comment: Based on this wording it is clear that Elsevier is requiring an
> exclusive publishing license. This is not compatible with your explanation
> below that nothing is required beyond attribution as required by the CC-BY
> license.
>

It is consistent - the article can be re-published elsewhere, providing it
is accordance with the CC-BY licence, including attribution to the
definitive record as published by Elsevier.

G
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20131210/bd592484/attachment.html