<p dir="ltr">A quick reply.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I would be extremely surprised if it mandated CC BY-NC specifically.</p>
<p dir="ltr">My impression and intuition would be that it meant CC BY-NC was the most restrictive licence allowed, but that CC0, CC BY and other more liberal licences were also allowed. Restriction of commercial usage being the only compliant restriction permitted (aside from attribution).</p>
<p dir="ltr">Best to ask Mark or someone at RCUK to be sure though.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Ross</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jan 30, 2013 5:01 PM, "Dan Stowell" <<a href="mailto:dan.stowell@eecs.qmul.ac.uk">dan.stowell@eecs.qmul.ac.uk</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Dear all,<br>
<br>
We're having some discussion in our research group here about the RCUK<br>
policy, and there's a point of interpretation, which I wonder if you've<br>
resolved yourselves.<br>
<br>
The question is whether RCUK policy on green OA implies a specific<br>
licence, and in particular whether it implies CC-BY-NC. I don't really<br>
want to discuss what the policy *should* be, if you don't mind - just<br>
trying to understand what the policy *is*.<br>
<br>
Linked from the RCUK's main outputs page<br>
<<a href="http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/outputs.aspx" target="_blank">http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/outputs.aspx</a>><br>
are two documents. One is the main policy document<br>
<<a href="http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/documents/documents/RCUK%20_Policy_on_Access_to_Research_Outputs.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/documents/documents/RCUK%20_Policy_on_Access_to_Research_Outputs.pdf</a>><br>
- it clearly says (sec 4.1) that gold must be CC-BY, while for green<br>
(sec 4.2) it says "the journal must allow deposit [...] in other<br>
repositories, without restrictions on non-commercial re-use and within a<br>
defined period." So it seems clear to me that that is not a positive<br>
requirement for a specific licence, but a negative requirement that we<br>
cannot do green OA that bans commercial use. The guidance document<br>
linked just below it does not narrow down green any further.<br>
<br>
However, linked from *the same page* is a presentation<br>
<<a href="http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/documents/documents/Thorley_RCUK_November2012.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/documents/documents/Thorley_RCUK_November2012.pdf</a>) which<br>
very clearly (slide 10) says "Green (at least post print) with a maximum<br>
embargo period of 6(12) months, and CC-BY-NC".<br>
<br>
Both of these cannot be true, or else I'm misinterpreting something.<br>
Does the Thorley presentation contain a mistaken assertion, or a missing<br>
context?<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
Dan<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Dan Stowell<br>
Postdoctoral Research Assistant<br>
Centre for Digital Music<br>
Queen Mary, University of London<br>
Mile End Road, London E1 4NS<br>
<a href="http://www.elec.qmul.ac.uk/digitalmusic/people/dans.htm" target="_blank">http://www.elec.qmul.ac.uk/digitalmusic/people/dans.htm</a><br>
<a href="http://www.mcld.co.uk/" target="_blank">http://www.mcld.co.uk/</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
GOAL mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org">GOAL@eprints.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal" target="_blank">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</a><br>
</blockquote></div>