Cc-europe mailing list

[Jonas Öberg <jonas AT creativecommons.org>]

Hi Timothy,

thanks a lot for your work. I'll likely send a response from the
Society for Free Culture & Software as well that go along the lines of
your response, and I would encourage others to do similarly either
individually or for their organisations.

Something that I thought about when reading the consultation and
answers is the issues of patents. Should we make some remarks about
this, for instance in relation to 4.5, regarding the ability to re-use
research findings? Science Commons could be relevant in this regard,
and might be a subject for the EC:s further studies.



Jonas


On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:59 AM, Timothy Vollmer
<tvol AT creativecommons.org> wrote:
> Hi all:
> RE:
> http://ec.europa.eu/research/consultations/scientific_information/consultation_en.htm,
> we at CC HQ have rounded up short answers (note only very short 400
> character text answers are allowed, AFAICT). The consultation period is open
> until 9 September.
> Do you have comments or feedback? Are other jurisdictions or persons
> coordinating on sending a response during this consultation? The
> questionnaire (PDF) attached.
> Thank you for any suggestions,
> timothy
>
>
> --------
>
>
> QUESTIONS:
> 3.4 Do you think that publications resulting from publicly funded research
> should, as a matter of principle, be available free of charge to readers on
> the internet (i.e. open access mode)?
> [agree strongly]
>
>
> 3.5 Do you think that open access can increase access to and dissemination
> of scientific publications?
> [agree strongly]
>
> 3.6 Do you think that open access to scientific publications can co-exist
> with the traditional scientific publication system?
> [agree]
>
> 3.8 General comments for this section (400 characters)
> This survey’s definition of Open Access as “access over the internet that is
> free of charge for the reader” is insufficient in supporting access and
> re-use of digital scientific information. Publications resulting from
> publicly funded research should be made available in accordance with the
> principles laid out in the Budapest Initiative, the Berlin Declaration, and
> the Bethesda Statement.
>
>
> 3.10 General comments for this section (400 characters)
> We believe that embargo periods are not necessarily inconsistent with the
> broad goals of open access, as long as the embargo period(s), if any, are
> reasonable, and that subsequent to the embargo period, scholarly papers
> published in journals are deposited in an online repository and made
> available for download free of charge and free of technical and legal
> restrictions.
>
>
> 4.4 Do you think that research data that is publicly available and that
> results from the PUBLIC funding should, as a matter of principle, be
> available for re-use and free from charge on the Internet?
> [strongly agree]
>
>
> 4.5 General comments for this section (400 characters)
> Scientific research data created as a result of public funding should be
> made broadly available to the public, preferably by releasing it
> unconditionally into the public domain. The CC0 public domain dedication is
> a tool that can be used in support of such a practice.
>
>
> 4.6 Do you think that research data that is publicly available and that
> results from PARTLY PUBLIC AND PARTLY PRIVATE funding should, as a matter of
> principle, be available for re-use and free of charge on the internet?
> [agree]
>
>
> 4.7 General comments for this section (400 characters)
> Scientific research data that is created as a result of partly public and
> partly private funding should be made broadly available, preferably by
> releasing it unconditionally into the public domain. Dedicating such
> research data to the public domain is preferable even when produced via
> mixed funding sources because it reduces interoperability challenges and
> promotes unencumbered access and re-use.
>
>
> 6.1 Additional comments (600 characters)
> The EC should continue to explore the challenges with combining data from
> public and private funding sources. Is publicly funded open data legally
> interoperable with privately funded data, some of which may be proprietary
> or released under an incompatible license? What determines whether data is
> characterized as publicly vs privately funded? Is any work of a researcher
> on salary from a publicly-funded higher education institution to be deemed
> publicly funded? What happens if a researcher has been working under private
> funding decides to finish the work with public grant funds?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Timothy Vollmer <tvol AT creativecommons.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hello all:
>> Just wanted to bring this to your attention, if you haven't seen already.
>> Following up on the public hearing Diane Cabell attended
>> [https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/27678] in Brussels RE: scientific
>> information in the digital age, there's now a public consultation process
>> open.
>>
>> http://www.epsiplatform.eu/news/news/open_access_to_scientific_information_ec_seeks_your_views
>> Looks like they want feedback via a survey. We think it's probably
>> worthwhile to send a response from CC. Are other European jurisdictions
>> planning on submitting something, or want to collaborate on a response?
>>
>> http://ec.europa.eu/research/consultations/scientific_information/consultation_en.htm
>>
>> Thanks,
>> timothy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Timothy Vollmer
>> http://creativecommons.org/about/people/#timothyvollmer
>
>
>
> --
> Timothy Vollmer
> http://creativecommons.org/about/people/#timothyvollmer
>