Self-correction (RE: OA and copyright (RE: Springer blasts Open Choice criticism)

["Rick Anderson" <rickand@unr.edu>]

In case anyone was confused by my reference below to the "Berlin,
Bethesda, Barcelona" OA protocols: I can only plead jet lag.  I obviously
should have said "Berlin, Bethesda, Budapest."

I'm preparing for a trip to Barcelona late next month, so I have that city
on the mind.  For the record, I do not plan to introduce any new OA
initiatives while there. :-)

----
Rick Anderson
Dir. of Resource Acquisition
University of Nevada, Reno Libraries
(775) 784-6500 x273
rickand@unr.edu  

> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Anderson
> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 7:03 PM
> To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> Subject: OA and copyright (RE: Springer blasts Open Choice criticism)
> 
> To the degree that people's objections are based on Springer's retention
> of copyright, it reflects an unfortunately narrow idea of OA. I don't
> see any reason to object to an OA model that allows the whole world to
> read the content while leaving the traditionally exclusive rights of
> copyright holders intact.  If the point of OA is to make content freely
> available, rather than to undermine the very concept of intellectual
> property, then there's no reason at all why copyright can't be retained
> by either authors or the publishers to whom authors assign it.  It's
> really too bad that the three prevailing OA protocols (Berlin, Bethesda,
> Barcelona)  all insist on requiring copyright holders to abdicate those
> exclusive rights.
> 
> ----
> Rick Anderson
> rickand@unr.edu