2009/1/3 Stevan Harnad <amsciforum_at_gmail.com>:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: leo waaijers <leowaa -- xs4all.nl>
> Date: Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 12:49 PM
> Subject: Re: The Liege IR Mandate is definitely (Immediate Deposit/Optional
> Access -- Dual Deposit/Release) (fwd)
> To: JISC-REPOSITORIES -- jiscmail.ac.uk
>
>
> Dear Klaus Graf,
>
> I think this debate is useless. I read your lengthy comment and ultimately
> your point is that the Liège Mandate does not go beyond the well known fair
> use clause. I think you are right; the Liège is converting 'fair use' into
> 'smart use'. It is a non-confronting endeavour to bypass the proprietary
> review process of the big publishing houses. Why calling it nonsense? It is
> just one way to better access to knowledge and Stevan Harnad and Bernard
> Rentier are strong believers in it. So, please Klaus Graf, what's your
> point?
>
> Leo Waaijers.
>
>
Read my contribution in German at
http://archiv.twoday.net
I have given enough arguments that the legal framework of Liege ORBi
is not valid or misleading.
I didn't say anything on the policy/the mandate.
If we have the BBB definition of OA we should avoid the impression
that everybody can interprete it as he likes. ORBi's license has
nothing to do with the OA definition of the Budapest Open Access
Initiative although it is referring to it in a very misleading way.
BBB has the aim to remove permission barriers, but ORBi - not allowing
derivative works or commercial use - gives by referring to BOAI the
false impression it is LIBRE OA. Almost all contents in "green" OA
repositories are'nt LIBRE, that's not the point.For few exceptions see
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/01-02-09.htm chapter 9
It cannot be accepted that a "legal license" referring to the
principles of BOAI simply means that the normal Belgian copyright (and
its exceptions) is valid. It's a sort of fraud.
Klaus Graf
Received on Sat Jan 03 2009 - 21:41:36 GMT