<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Pippa Smart <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pippa.smart@gmail.com" target="_blank">pippa.smart@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">There are a few issues here and I think it is important to separate them out.<div><br></div><b>$400 for course packs</b><div><div>OUP allows authors who want open access to select whether they want to restrict reuse of their article - to prevent commercial or derivative reuses. It is the authors that select the licence they want to use - unless their funder forces them to use a particular licence.</div><div><br></div><div>The CC BY licence allows anyone (including OUP) to reuse content for commercial reasons - i.e. to sell the articles. CC BY means that if I want to use the articles to create a coursepack then I do not have to ask permission - the CC BY licence allows me to do this. It also allows me to sell my coursepacks (even if they comprise only CC BY articles). However if I "want" to pay then there is nothing to stop someone making a charge. [Example - someone has downloaded a series of OA CC BY articles published in PLOS Medicine and is selling them as a book on Amazon - this is entirely legitimate under CC BY].</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Here is OUP's wording (via RightsLink) for re-use in a pharmaceutical context for a ** CC-BY** article<br><br><p class="" name="pgTitleDenyRedirect" id="pgTitleDenyRedirect">>>Please Contact Oxford University Press</p>
<p class="" name="InstructionsDenyRedirect" id="InstructionsDenyRedirect">>>Please
note republication of content for pharmaceutical use requires
authorization from an Oxford University Press customer service
representative directly. Please e-mail your request to <a href="mailto:corporate.services@oup.com">corporate.services@oup.com</a></p>PMR> This states categorically that OUP forbids the re-use of CC-BY articles. I will not imply motivation to OUP - if it is deliberate then they have a case to answer. If it is not, then does it reflect a high standard of customer care (to the author, who has paid a lot of money)?<br><br></div><div>This is not an isolated case - it's endemic in the Scholarly publishing industry. Elsevier calls it "The Bumpy Road" - i.e. we should feel sympathy for Elsevier in the difficult task of getting this service right. Remember that it costs a lot of money to publish CC-BY. The author's rights have been ignored.<br><br></div><div>Much of the wording in Reuse Permissions is weighted towards purchase even when the reader or re-user can technically get it somewhere for free. <br><br></div><div>And, of course, there is the additional ongoing problem when articles which authors have paid to have Open, are hidden behind a paywall.<br><br>===========<br></div><br><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><br></div><div>If an author wants to publish under a CC BY-non-commercial licence, then they must grant OUP commercial rights - otherwise OUP could not publish their work in this (commercial) journal.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The main problem here is exclusive, ongoing rights. Rights to publish are not the same as re-use rights which (especially in the pharma industry) can run into 7 figures for a single instance.<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><br></div><br clear="all"></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">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</div>
</div></div>