In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Mark Kent
<mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:44:21 +0100
<leo2r4-q0h.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> OUP wants me to pay for my own Open Access article
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| The journal wishes to charge me 48 USD to:
>>|
>>| * USE MY OWN ARTICLE
>>| * ON WHICH I HOLD COPYRIGHT
>>| * FOR NON-COMMERCIAL PURPOSES (TEACHING)
>>|
>>| The journal is therefore
>>|
>>| * SELLING MY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
>>| * WITHOUT MY PERMISSION
>>| * AGAINST THE TERMS OF THE LICENCE (NO COMMERCIAL USE)
>>|
>>| I am lost for words...
>> `----
>>
>> http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust/?p=529
>>
>> Some people *do* get it. Information/knowledge, just like software
>> shouldn't necessarily become a commodity.
>>
>
> I thought that academia was supposed to work through sharing of
> information, not through locking it up.
>
The terrorists might do something with it that might lead
to dancing. Can't be too careful nowadays.
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- insert random dance steps here
Linux. Because it's not the desktop that's
important, it's the ability to DO something
with it.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
