<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small">Why not using one license (say CC0) as default while offering the option for a second one (say CC-BY-SA)?<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 19 August 2017 at 18:51, maxigas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:maxigas@anargeek.net" target="_blank">maxigas@anargeek.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Andreas Wittel <<a href="mailto:andreas.wittel@gmail.com">andreas.wittel@gmail.com</a>> writes:<br>
<br>
> I am not an expert on copyright, but feel strongly about some implications<br>
> of what we are discussing. To outline briefly my politics: As a Marxist, I<br>
> am all for open access, but find some of the free culture positions rather<br>
> problematic, particularly those ones that are rooted in liberal theory<br>
> (Stallman, Lessig, Benkler etc).<br>
><br>
> One of these positions is the idea that academic should not only make<br>
> available their work for free, but also make it available in a format does<br>
> not respect authors rights in that it does not care about attribution. In a<br>
> neoliberal climate that massively devalues academic labour it is not a wise<br>
> strategy to devalue academic labour even further and to do so voluntarily.<br>
> Therefore I do not support copyright politics, that contribute to new<br>
> levels of proletaristion of academic labour.<br>
><br>
> But this is not just about politics, it also about the future orientation<br>
> of this journal. I would be very hesitant to publish in a journal that<br>
> invites and encourages the use of my labour without appropriation. And I<br>
> have a feeling I am not the only academic with such a view. So to go for<br>
> PD, and for that matter for CC0 has imho the long-term effect that<br>
> academics will stay away from JOPP and that the reputation of JOPP as a<br>
> journal with high-quality academic rigour could seriously suffer.<br>
><br>
> My preference would be CC-BY-SA<br>
<br>
Heh, I would argue for CC0 for similar reasons that Andreas argues for<br>
CC-BY-SA. I don't think academics today have to (or empirical are)<br>
relying on the copyright regime to enforce attribution (BY) or the<br>
misrepresentation of their work (SA) -- these are tools that publishers<br>
use to extort money from academics and other consumers. Academics have<br>
their own culture, ethics and even legal regulations to address problems<br>
of non-attribution (e.g. plagiarism) and misrepresentation (for instance<br>
straw man arguments), and these should be adequate to address the<br>
matter. I would use CC0 simply to ensure that the journal content is<br>
available to readers without relying on the copyright regime as little<br>
as possible. To summarise: I argue that respect for and enforcement of<br>
IP rights contributes to the proletarisation of academic labour much<br>
more than defends against it. Therefore, we should dismantle it.<br>
<br>
I also agree with Stefan Meretz that our PD/CC0 policy is one of the<br>
things that sets JoPP apart from other open access journals, which buy<br>
into the more restrictive and more pro-IP regimes offered by Creative<br>
Commons. So far I was very happy to explore an alternative path based on<br>
trying to have as less restrictions as legally possible. As Zack<br>
mentions, there are already plenty of other journals who are working<br>
with more restrictive licences.<br>
<br>
Parts of my articles have been cut up and published in fanzines, mostly<br>
with attribution as a courtesy, but sometimes without. Sometimes<br>
fanzines are sold for a price and profits go to the publisher. Do I<br>
mind? No, my livelyhood is not dependent on how many people credit me,<br>
except citations in academic publications, which are, again, governed by<br>
scientific norms and not IP law. What I care about is that the material<br>
is available for read and reuse.<br>
<br>
I think the subtle shift from an informal PD dedication to the formal<br>
application of CC0 would be sufficient to clarify the questions about<br>
author rights that are necessary for JoPP to be listed as Open Access. I<br>
prefer this solution, rather than imposing more terms for conformity's<br>
sake, or in hopes that the IP regime would serve the interest of<br>
authors. Sorry to chime in late too, and make the discussion more<br>
difficult.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
maxigas, kiberpunk<br>
FA00 8129 13E9 2617 C614 0901 7879 63BC 287E D166<br>
<a href="https://relay70.metatron.ai/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://relay70.metatron.ai/</a><br>
<br>
~ We are the static site generation!<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
JoPP-Public mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:JoPP-Public@lists.ourproject.org">JoPP-Public@lists.ourproject.<wbr>org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/jopp-public" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/<wbr>cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/jopp-<wbr>public</a><br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><span><font size="2">Dr. Vasilis Kostakis<br><br><font size="1">Senior Research Fellow, Tallinn University of Technology<br>Research Affiliate, Harvard University<br>Founder, P2P Lab</font><br></font></span></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>