The International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM) has revealed some new “model” licenses which are ironically entitled “making OA licensing work”. We’re sorry, did we miss something?
Here at ScienceOpen, we believe that Creative Commons (CC and in particular the CC-BY license which we use because it facilitates comprehensive re-use) is the best license suite for open content. CC is successfully used by organizations in and beyond scholarly publishing. It provides an interoperable and simple standard. So exactly why do we need to introduce a whole new level of licensing complication?
For those of us who already spend a great deal of time trying to navigate complex copyright waters in an effort to blend and re-use research content and bring it to life for a broader audience, the introduction of more restrictive licensing is NOT WELCOME.
Rather than just ranting alone, we’ve expressed our displeasure by adding our name to the growing list of organizations that are calling for STM to withdraw these new licenses.
We’re grateful to PLOS (in particular Cameron Neylon and Catriona MacCallum) for reaching out to us and organizing the Global Coalition of Access to Research, Science and Education Organizations.