Hi all. This entire discussion is very timely. My organization, the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) is planning to transition to 100% Open Access publication at the end of 2025. Currently, authors of papers that will be published on an Open Access basis have the option of selecting from a menu of Creative Commons licensing options or to select a “No CC” option. There’s been some discussion of this approach on this listserv in the recent past.

 

One thing we are struggling with that would benefit from feedback on this thread is how to approach CC licensing options once we finalize the transition to 100% OA publication in 2026. Currently, there are several options that ACM is seriously considering, as follows:

 

Option 1 – Simplify the CC options and only offer CC-BY-4.0 (the least restrictive option) and remove the “non-exclusive license to publish” and “No CC” options at the same time (which are currently options for authors to select). CC-Zero remains valid for data, code, and other research artifacts.

 

Option 2 – Keep the multiple CC options (NC, ND, NC-ND, etc.) for authors to select at their discretion, remove the “non-exclusive license to publish” and “No-CC” options at the same time.

 

I would very much welcome feedback and advice from the library community along with explanations of why one of the above approaches is better than the other for various stakeholders. If an Option 3 exists that is worth considering, I would welcome this as well.

 

Thank you in advance for your feedback.

 

Regards,

Scott Delman
ACM Director of Publications

Assoc. Computing Machinery
1601 Broadway, 10th Floor
New York, New York 10019
Office: +1-212-626-0659
Mobile: +1-212-729-7515
Fax: +1-212-869-0481
Email: [log in to unmask]
Skype: scott.delman
https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottdelman
ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0381-0696

 

 

From: OpenCafe-l <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, August 19, 2024 at 1:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...

I don’t think anyone is claiming that no lobbyists were involved. I’m sure the publishing lobby was pushing for these reports, just as I’m sure SPARC and its dark-money backers were pushing for the Nelson OSTP’s update of the Holdren Memo.

 

---

Rick Anderson

University Librarian

Brigham Young University

(801) 422-4301

[log in to unmask]

 

 

From: Jim O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, August 19, 2024 at 11:05 AM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: James O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...

 

So it's a small group of dedicated public servants, engaged in rational analysis and discourse with one another, and independently coming up with similar thoughtful and eirenic recommendations?  No politicians, no lobbyists, no vested interests, nobody whose ox might be gored, just pure and serene public policy?  An inspiring thought, but really?

 

Jim O'Donnell

ASU

 

On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 9:05 AM Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

It’s the Senate and House Appropriations Committees, each of which has written a separate report expressing concern about implementation of the Nelson Memo.

 

Relevant section of the House committee report: https://www.congress.gov/118/crpt/hrpt582/CRPT-118hrpt582.pdf#page=92

 

… and of the Senate committee report: https://www.congress.gov/118/crpt/srpt198/CRPT-118srpt198.pdf#page=149

 

---

Rick Anderson

University Librarian

Brigham Young University

(801) 422-4301

[log in to unmask]

 

 

From: Jim O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, August 19, 2024 at 10:00 AM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...

 

Rick, where do you think this opposition is coming from?  “Appropriators” is a very anonymous screen behind which is … ?

 

Jim O’Donnell

ASU

On Monday, August 19, 2024, Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

https://ww2.aip.org/fyi/lawmakers-raise-new-licensing-concerns-over-white-house-open-access-mandate

 

Pull quote: “appropriators in both chambers of Congress have advanced legislation that would block federal agencies from limiting authors’ ability to choose how to license their work.”

 

---

Rick Anderson

University Librarian

Brigham Young University

(801) 422-4301

[log in to unmask]

 

 

---

Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives

To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]

 

---

Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives

To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]

---

Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives

To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]