tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295142910003544116.post7832489953609244116..comments2023-11-05T07:28:40.897+00:00Comments on Information Research - ideas and debate: 'Adaptation' and 'derivation' in Creative Commons' licencesTom Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02395477519435075777noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295142910003544116.post-81693831977673793082007-11-20T12:07:00.000+00:002007-11-20T12:07:00.000+00:00I thought I'd explained the reason: it is essentia...I thought I'd explained the reason: it is essentially ethical - why should commercial interests profit from the free labour of others? Heaven knows, commercial publishers have done so long enough through the scholarly publishing busines!<BR/><BR/>There is also an economic reason Information Research is produced entirely through voluntary effort, but that effort has costs - of software, of server maintenance, of the opportunity cost of my time and the time of others, etc., etc. Any unrewarded commercial use of the papers published in Information Research removes the opportunity for income. This is why we published 'Introducting information management' (edited by Maceviciute and Wilson, Facet Publishing, 2005) and directed that the royalties, otherwise payable to the editors and authors, should be paid to Lund University Libraries and this is why any income from our arrangement with Ebsco will also be paid to Lund University Libraries.<BR/><BR/>Simply because authors give their work freely to the journal, which makes it freely accessible to the world at large, does not mean that we should forego any possibility of income to support the journal.Tom Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02395477519435075777noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2295142910003544116.post-78083603686030239752007-11-20T12:05:00.000+00:002007-11-20T12:05:00.000+00:00The notion that any commercial organization could ...<I>The notion that any commercial organization could then take the papers and use them for commercial purposes is a complete anathema to me.</I> <BR/>Why so? As an author (not in Inf Res, but in other scholarly journals) I would have no objection whatsoever to commercial re-use. I understand that selling reprints is big business in some fields (e.g. biomed, where Big Pharma likes to send reprints to prescribing physicians), and in such fields smaller publishers avoid CC-BY, keeping the NC license so that the reprint sellers are forced to pay royalties. But unless I missed something, Inf Res is not charging or making money, so what does the journal lose by allowing commercial re-use?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com