Joanna Wild and Rowan Wilson recently published an article on the Impact of Social Sciences blog about the Creative Commons licensing framework. As there has been confusion about what the licenses mean for academic publishing in the past, their article deciphers the details of a CC BY license, which allows for remixing, tweaking and redistributing, as long as the author is credited. The article also goes into details on other CC licensing, which makes it a helpful overview of the distinctions between licenses and what each means for the readers and users as well as the authors.
Robert Harington discusses the fundamentalism that pervades discussions around open access policies and business models in a blog post on scholarlykitchen. In his article he discusses open access models, asks for more rationality in the OA-debate and warns of policy mandates that potentially discourage innovation.
Tom Olijhoek posted an article in the Open Access Working Group Blog of the Open Knowledge Foundation. His article exhibits the pros and cons of open access publishing and gives a good overview to the state of open access publishing right now. He then argues for fully implemented open access and lays open how different the costs for publishing are depending on the publishers. He ends the article with a call for action and has opened a joined spreadsheet which is supposed to lay open all charges by publishers.
In a post on f1000research.com Eva Amsen looks at the meaning and history of open peer review. Her defining article includes a timeline and benefits of open peer review and is part of a series on the principles of the f1000 research community.
Evgeny Morozov criticizes Google in a recent article on the “right to be forgotten” debate. Google’s Eric Schmidt recently answered the “right to be forgotten” claims with his own, saying that people also had a “right to know”. Morozov, however,believes the “right to know” translates into a “right to profit from your personal information”. Read the full article here.