If you have an interest in learning more about the Creative Commons and open access licensing issues. This year, the Creative Commons began offering an online certificate program, which helps you learn about all things CC. It started as a sort of beta offer but has matured. The certificate originally targeted educators and librarians, which got my interest so I signed up certificates.creativecommons.orgContinue reading “Creative Commons Certificate Program”
This short presentation helps distinguish the idea of a collection of work versus “remixing” and adapting work. This presentation is available as a LibreOffice odp file here.
Here are three things about various attributes that can be found in Creative Commons licences, which I find are not necessarily obvious, but good to know (details on the CC site).
First, when a CC licence has a NonCommercial (NC) designation, it means, roughly, that employing the work for a commercial use is not permitted. But it’s not quite that straightforward. The work’s creator wants other people to use the work (according to whatever permissions they’ve granted) but does not intend anyone acquiring the work through its Creative Commons licensed version, to profit from it.
There’s an interesting distinction though between use and user. You can’t make a blanket assumption about the use of the work based on the person or organization using it. Even a for-profit company for example, could use an NC designated work for a variety of things so long as they’re not selling it for profit (which would then qualify as commercial use).
The ShareAlike (SA) designation results in something like a viral impact. When someone licences a work with SA then other people that for example make something new with it, also have to release their new work with an SA designation in kind. This is beneficial in that those adopting it, potentially increase the availability of new works and ensure that work continues to be shared (nourishing the commons). This is akin to the requirements in Free software licences like the GPL, which have contributed to an extremely large Free and open source software ecosystem.
And finally, if the NoDerivatives (ND) aspect is present in a CC licence, it’s actually more permissive than it might sound. It does not prohibit making derivatives entirely. The Creative Commons pus a lot of emphasis on the commons, an effort in large part to increase what we can all share access to. So in that sense, ND has more to do with the act of sharing a derivative than of making it. That’s to say, you can make a derivative work of an ND-licensed work but you don’t have the permission to distribute that derivative.
International Open Access Week spans 22 – 28 of October this year. It’s a great time to find out more about open access initiatives that you can both benefit from and participate in.
Open Access enables people to learn from a much greater commons of research and knowledge than would otherwise be possible. It’s a movement very much inline with the missions of libraries and with the research life cycle. Without open access we’re left with a scholarly ecosystem dependent on a few powerful commercial interests. Those commercial interests tend to control or prevent access except for the parties able to pay the most. A detriment to access-to-knowledge and research. Continue reading “Open Access Week 2018”
Copyright gives the people that create various works, certain legal controls over those works. As the name suggests, it limits copying (thus various forms of usage) to those authorized to do so. Depending on jurisdictions, it also codifies things such as moral rights.
The Creative Commons licences simplify an author’s ability to authorize copying and use of their work. CC licences leverage the control that copyright establishes and an author can use these licences to, in a sense, automate control. Rather than negotiate requests from every party that wants to use, derive new works, or copy the work, an author can clearly state what they’d like to be able to happen with the work upon expressing it to the public. Then anyone can use it as the author has intended.Continue reading “Briefly, about Copyright Law & CC Licences”
Last Friday night, I watched the new documentary, Paywall: The Business of Scholarship. If you’re involved in research, scholarly communication, or even just concerned with the availability of knowledge (especially as it results from public funding), then I recommend watching this film. You can easily stream it and, in-line with its subject matter, it will not cost you anything.
The Mastodon social network system is the most promising advance I’ve seen recently toward establishing a better, more compelling social networking system.
I’ll explain why I think it’s worth leaving closed networks like Twitter, Facebook, Google Plus, etc. for Mastodon. I’d also like to say a little about how Mastodon works and mention something nice for the academic community. Perhaps you use something like Academia.edu or ResearchGate? Perhaps you’ve heard of
ScholarlyHub.org (edit 2022: no longer exists)? Then perhaps you should know about Scholar.social. But first, Mastodon. Continue reading “Switch to a Mastodon Social Network”
Open data is a well-defined concept but in the public sector, there is some difficult work ahead for its digital curation.
Although the support and production of open data from governments around the world varies (with many not yet supporting it at all) there are clear movements to encourage and grow open government data initiatives. Within the realm of governments that do support and produce datasets open to the public, benefits that would otherwise accompany the availability of this open data are sometimes hampered due to incomplete adoption of best practices.
I’d like review some of the tenets of open government data, then I’ll discuss some of the digital curation issues that are important to deal with for the success of open government data initiatives.
Note: this article is cross-posted on my other blog.