[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Peggy Hoon on licenses
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: Peggy Hoon on licenses
- From: Mark Kurtz <mkurtz@arl.org>
- Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 19:22:06 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
A number of model licenses have what appear to me a very clear definition of Commercial Use (BioOne has adopted this definition). This, from licensingmodels.org's Consortial License, is a good example: Commercial Use Use for the purposes of monetary reward (whether by or for the Consortium or a Member or an Authorized User) by means of sale, resale, loan, transfer, hire or other form of exploitation of the Licensed Materials. Neither recovery of direct costs by the Consortium or any Member from Authorized Users, nor use by the Consortium or a Member or by an Authorized User of the Licensed Materials in the course of research funded by a commercial organization, is deemed to be Commercial Use. Mark Kurtz | Director of Business Development | BioOne 21 Dupont Circle Suite 800 | Washington, DC 20036 Phone 202.296.1605 ext. 5 | Fax 202.872.0884 | Cell 617.669.4276 mkurtz@arl.org www.BioOne.org On Mar 2, 2011, at 5:54 PM, Sandy Thatcher wrote: > While I agree about the general utility of CC licenses, I wish > someone could explain to me what the difference between > "commercial" and "noncommercial" use is. The CC itself conducted > a survey a couple of years ago and found little consensus beyond > a very small core of shared understanding of what the distinction > connotes. This is not just a philosophical concern, since very > real practical consequences depend on knowing the difference as > it applies to various publishing ventures. > > Sandy Thatcher > > >> The best licensing in existence for scholarly communication, >> IMHO, is CC licensing, as this simplifies understanding of how >> materials can be used. CC licenses are used by >> subscriptions-based as well as open access publishers. Of course, >> this does not help when we are licensing resources from vendors / >> publishers who do not use CC licenses. The reason that I bring >> this up is because all of us who work with vendors at any level >> can play a useful role in helping them to understand the current >> and evolving needs of scholarship, so that they can develop >> practices which will help them to survive and thrive into the >> future. >> >> best, >> >> Heather G. Morrison >> Project Coordinator >> BC Electronic Library Network >
- Prev by Date: RE: Peggy Hoon on licenses
- Next by Date: RE: Peggy Hoon on licenses
- Previous by thread: RE: Peggy Hoon on licenses
- Next by thread: RE: Peggy Hoon on licenses
- Index(es):