<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Hans Pfeiffenberger <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hans.pfeiffenberger@awi.de" target="_blank">hans.pfeiffenberger@awi.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Mark,<br>
<br>
<div>Am 01.02.13 11:07, schrieb Thorley,
Mark R.:<br>
</div><div class="im">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>The policy does not define a specific licence for green deposit, provided non-commercial re-use such as text and data mining is supported.
</pre>
</blockquote></div>
if now Google (Scholar) set out to go beyond indexing and offered
(free) access to text mining of the documents they crawled, this
would most certainly be a commercial activity. <br>
<br>
Wouldn't you think that an explicit endorsement of publishers
claiming a limitation of commercial use from authors is unwise? </div></blockquote><div> </div><div>NC is a minefield and I predict that no-one will ever take someone to court for violating it. However I think many publishers will generate FUD around it. And FUD paralyses academics, especially the library.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">How
can repositories make sure that "nobody" is making commercial use of
the manuscripts they hold? Do they need to exclude Google (Scholar)
from indexing, just in case? <br></div></blockquote><div> </div><div>Publishers as well as repositories have a Faustian bargain with Google. Publishers need Google as they are otherwise incapable of providing modern search tools. But publishers need to prevent innovation from people like me as it threatens their "ownership of content".</div>
<div> </div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
(@PMR: Contrary to what you believe, I would operate and formulate
policy from the assumption that sooner or later documents from
almost <b>all</b> disciplines may be mined profitably).<br></div></blockquote><div>I completely believe that that "sooner or later documents from almost <b>all</b> disciplines may be mined profitably". We are developing our technology ("liberation software") with CC-BY publishing as being sued by publishers is a distraction from writing code.</div>
<div> </div><div>But coome October 2013 in UK Hargreaves says all bets are off. Our sotware will be running red-hot after that date. It takes ca 1 sec on my laptop to mine a page. There are perhaps 30 million pages publised per year. That's </div>
<div> </div><div>ONE-LAPTOP_YEAR to mine the whole STM literature</div><div> </div><div>And the product will be an order of magnitude more valuable than any current closed scientific databases. The results will be fully semantic with recall/precision perhaps 50%.</div>
<div> </div><div> Anyone can join us</div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
Just to mention another commercial use: ResearchGate (allegedly a
social network for researchers) and similars are certainly for
profit (even if one cannot see how they could make a profit). Is a
researcher allowed to upload their manuscript there?<br>
<br></div></blockquote><div> </div><div>Or Mendeley? The whole thing is absurd. The major commercial publishers are simply FUDging for time.</div><div> </div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
best,<br>
<br>
Hans <br>
</div>
<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>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><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