On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Carlos Monterrey
<cmonterrey(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Hi all,
Here is the proposed SM for today's blog post regarding the new open access
license from the International Association of Scientific, Technical &
Medical Publishers. Thanks for reviewing:
Blog post:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/07/new-open-licenses-arent-so-open/
SM calendar:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Social_media/Calendar#August_4-August_10
New “open” licenses aren’t so open
t: WMF joins 55 other open access groups in protesting “open” licenses that
aren’t actually open:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/07/new-open-licenses-arent-so-open/ Suggest to
write out WMF, and drop the "other" (even though it's in
the blog post):
Wikimedia Foundation joins 55 open access groups in protesting “open”
licenses that aren’t actually open:
t: See why the WMF is against the latest licenses by the Association of
Scientific, Technical & Medical
Publishers:https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/07/new-open-licenses-arent-so…
Doesn't mention "open"... Suggest this instead, as followup tweet
from
@wikipedia:
Open access scholarship enriches Wikipedia, but the "open access"
licenses proposed by @STMAssoc trade group won't:
t: See why this new open access license fails to meet
the standards set by
the Freedom and Open Knowledge
Definition:https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/07/new-open-licenses-arent-so…
This would be more correct (but I prefer the preceding tweets anyway):
See why these new "open access' licenses fail to meet the standards
set by the Freedom and Open Knowledge Definitions:
f/g: The new “open access” license by the International Association of
Scientific Technical & Medical Publishers (STM) fails to meet the basic
standards set out by the Freedom Definition and the Open Knowledge
Definition. The Wikimedia Foundation joins the Public Library of Science,
Open Knowledge and many other groups in urging STM to withdraw these
licenses.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/07/new-open-licenses-arent-so-open/
With some fixes and tweaks:
The so called “open access” licenses proposed by STM, a trade
association of academic publishing companies, fail to meet the basic
standards set out by the Freedom Definition and the Open Knowledge
Definition.
The Wikimedia Foundation joins the Public Library of Science, Open
Knowledge and many other groups in urging STM to withdraw these
licenses.
--
Tilman Bayer
Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB