UPDATE: Make sure to read the interview with ResourceShelf friend and a leader in the Open Access movement, Peter Suber on Richard Poynder’s weblog. Direct to Suber’s own site, an essential resource, Open Access News.

When Is Open Access Not Open Access?

Not all of the confusion about open access that currently permeates the scholarly publishing industry is likely to be intentional (at least not all of it); much arises from a genuine misunderstanding of open access by funders, authors, editors, and publishers alike. However, no matter how unintentional such obfuscation might be, it is detrimental to the free exchange and use of scholarly research. It is now time for all publishers to tighten the definition and application of open access and be clearer about the uses and restrictions applied to their articles. Open access is a term that should only be used when the license permits both free access and unrestricted derivative use (and gives appropriate attribution). Authors and funders need to be much more aware of the small print before inadvertently signing away their rights and those of their readers and, even worse, paying good money for the privilege.

Source: PLoS Biology

This entry was posted on Friday, October 19th, 2007 at 12:59 am and is filed under Access to Information, Intellectual Property, Scholarly Publishing. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.