Is Creative Commons Flexible Enough for Historians?

Gumby and Monkey, by Joe (CC-BY-SA)

Creative Commons licenses are incredibly useful. They're easy to use. More and more people understand them. It's even possible to do web searches of Creative Commons content making it easy to find content you can use with confidence. The Open Access movement, particularly in the UK, seems to be promoting Creative Commons licensing as the best way to move towards open access to research, because it means we can (largely) leave lawyers out of it all and implement a standard set of licenses that everyone understands (or should understand). I see the practical merits in that and am a big fan of keeping costs at a minimum. But I also see the counterpoint, that many historians feel Creative Commons just isn't designed for them (see my previous post on Alternative Licensing). Sometimes that feeling is based on a misunderstanding. Sometimes, I think, it's justified. In the interest of opening that discussion, I thought I'd present a couple of scenarios in which I believe Creative Commons is not flexible enough for historians looking to manage the rights associated with their research.

For all of these scenarios, let's assume the work in question is an academic monograph written solely by me.

1) Supporting certain derivations

What I want: I'd like people to be able to translate my book into a range of formats (braile, French, audio, stage performance) without having to ask me, provided that every effort is made to ensure that the translation accurately represents the arguments and positions of the original, and the translator is listed as such on the title page or where applicable. This reuse is only permitted if the entire work is included in the translation.

Why this is important to me: I'm a big supporter of accessibility; I wouldn't want anyone working to provide access to my work for the blind to feel they were prevented from doing that good work by a legal restriction.

Why CC is not sufficient: CC-BY would allow this type of reuse. But it would also allow someone to translate only the introduction, or to pick and choose parts and rearrange them in a way that changes my message. I'm worried if they do that someone might get the wrong idea about my work. You may not think that's important, but it's my book and my reputation, and I am worried. I could use a 'no derivatives' license, CC-BY-ND, but I do want to allow certain types of derivatives under certain conditions.

2) Supporting certain commercial reuses

What I want: I'd like professors creating course readers to feel empowered to use parts of my book with their students. I'd also like private individuals to be able to use individual chapters in edited collections with modest print runs (let's say less than 500). I don't want Evil Publishing Ltd to be able to do the same without asking.

Why this is important to me: I'm a big supporter of ensuring students and my colleagues have access to my work. I also think it's important to support small entrepreneurs. But I know that the publishing industry is big business, and if they're going to make big money from my ideas, I think it's fair to ask that I get a cut of that. Anyone who has ever licensed stock imagery to use on a website or in print knows that the price of the license changes with the number of 'impressions'. In essence, the bigger the advertising campaign, the more money they want to charge you to use the image. This merely attempts to apply those types of restrictions on my book.

Why CC is not sufficient: CC-BY wouldn't give me the power to put the restrictions on Evil Publishing Ltd that I believe is important. Forcing me to use CC in this instance forces me to give away rights I would like to hold onto.

* * *

Those are just a couple of simple examples, which I don't believe are far fetched when considering licensing and reuse from the historian's perspective. For them to work, I think at the very least we need to adopt a CC-BUT license, in which creators are allowed to add restrictions to their license. As I said before, if the concerns of licensors aren't met, they won't get on board. I'd like them on board, but that may need to come at the expense of what seems on the surface to be a simple CC solution.

Sustainable History: Ensuring today's digital history survives

28 November 2013
10am-3:30pm
Institute of Historical Research,
Malet St, London
WC1E 7HU
Register: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/event/8989595121 

How long will our digital research survive? Historical scholarship is increasingly digital; and yet we do not have an agreed form of best practices for ensuring that digital scholarship lasts. Speakers at this one day workshop will share practical advice on a range of pressing issues for historians and cultural heritage professionals working with digital material. From ensuring research data is archived safely, to building sustainable strategies into your project workflows, and even learning from the mistakes of others, this event promises practical solutions for big challenges facing digital scholarship.

Registration is free, but spaces are limited (Register here: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/event/8989595121).

Sponsored by the Software Sustainability Institute, the Institute of Historical Research, the Programming Historian 2, and The AHRC Theme Leader Fellowship for Digital Transformations. 

Programme

Registration / Welcome  9:30-10:15am
Keynote Addresses  10:15-11am

• Professor Andrew Prescott, (Dept. of Digital Humanities, King’s College London)
•  Neil Grindley(JISC)

Tea / Coffee  11am-11:15am
Session 1: Preserving Resources 11:15am-12:15pm

• Dr. James Baker (British Library) ‘Preserving Research Data for the Future’
• Jennifer Doyle (King’s College London) ‘Working with Cultural Heritage to Open Research Data’

Lunch 12:15pm -1pm

Session 2: Working Together for the Long-term 1pm-2:30pm                                    

• Dr. Gethin Rees (University of Cambridge) ‘Capturing and Documenting Workflows for Historical Scholarship’
• Mia Ridge (Open University) ‘Sustaining Collaboration from Afar’
• Claire Donaghue (Imperial College London) ‘Strategies for Working Together on Large Projects’

Tea / Coffee 2:30-2:45  

Keynote Address and Open Discussion 2:45-3:30                                                       

•  Dr. Peter Webster (British Library)

Academic Freedom License: An Alternative to CC-BY

Professor Peter Mandler, President of the Royal Historical Society allegedly made this comment today at an Open Access event held in London. I was not at the event, but I have heard this concern expressed before: CC-BY licenses allow someone to take an academic work, completely twist the words of the author, and republish it in a way that suggests those are the opinions of the author (either intentionally or through ignorance).

The fear is certainly valid, whether you agree with the interpretation of the license or not. No academic would be happy with the idea of someone twisting their words and republishing something that, if misconstrued, could damage their reputation as a scholar.

I'm inclined to suggest that a CC-BY license does not in fact grant these rights, as the fine print about 'moral rights' points out, noting that 'derogatory treatment' of the licensor's work is not permitted.

Nevertheless, the terms of the license do suggest it is up to the licensor to monitor and police this activity, and if necessary, turn to the courts to enforce it. That's just not practical for a busy academic.

Remixing isn't the only problem. Copyright of images or graphs can also be an issue. Anyone who gives a public lecture these days will be familiar with the release forms that you're asked to sign that require you to grant someone the right to reproduce images and graphs you don't own that happen to be on your powerpoint slides. Academic monographs have the same problem. How can we release our content as open access if the work contains someone else's work for which we have had to ask permission?

If I'm not mistaken, these two issues are the biggest objections to CC-BY licenses for the humanities and social sciences. Thankfully, Professor Mandler has offered another solution, and I'm all for solutions:

New License needed for HSS (Humanities and Social Sciences)

What a fabulous idea. What on earth are we waiting for? I present to you all for consultation: the Academic Freedom License, designed specifically with the needs of academics in mind, that both promotes open access and reuse, and prevents the types of abuses outlined above.

Academic Freedom License

For works released under an 'Academic Freedom License', you are granted the right:

To Share - to copy, distribute and transmit the work in its entirety only.
To Analyse - to data mine and study the work and publish or create work of your own based on that analysis.
To Sell - to make commercial use of the work in its entirety only.

Under the following conditions:

Attribution - You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work)

Excluding - You are prohibited from sharing, analysing, or selling any aspects of the work specified by the author or licensor (such as images under copyright or sections not produced by the author)

With the understanding that:

Waiver - Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.

Public Domain - Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

Other Rights - In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license:

• Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations;
• the author's moral rights
• Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights

Would you buy a product to support digital humanities?

I'm launching an experiment, and I'd love for you to be involved. My PhD funding has just run out and I've been given a final £350 tuition bill during what's known as my 'writing up' period. In my search for solutions to cover this cost, I've found dozens of small grants that will pay for me to buy train tickets or hotel stays for research trips or conferences. I've found dozens more that will let me buy train tickets or hotel stays for others to come to a conference I'd organize. I can even get money to buy equipment for my research projects. But no one will give me money to pay my rather modest fees.

So I've decided to be creative. Crowdfunding has become rather trendy lately. Sites such as Kickstarter are even being taught as part of digital humanities courses, suggesting those of us in the field need to get out there and convince the public to part with some money in support of the research we do. Shawn Graham at Carleton University is now using this idea to raise money for an Undergraduate Scholarship in digital history, with funds to be matched by his university if he meets a certain threshold, and I wish him the best with what I consider a great initiative. But I know the marketplace can only handle so many campaigns that take the same form. So I've decided to go another route and ask: would you buy a product if you knew the procedes went to support digital humanities? Or more specifically: helped to pay my tuition fees?

So I've teamed up with Cafepress, and designed some digital humanities schwag to tempt you into my experiment. I've focused my product line on three key areas for the digital humanities:

1. Bags and Electronics - Your electronics never looked so digital humanities
2. Baby Clothes - Your baby makes digital humanities look good
3. Mugs and Water Bottles - Support digital humanities while you drink

All of my profits will go directly towards my tuition fees. And in the interest of this experiment, I'll report back on progress at the end of 2013 when these limited edition products will disappear FOREVER! Are baby clothes the key to the future of digital humanities? We'll soon find out.

I thank you most humbly for your support.
Edited note: It has been wisely pointed out to me that not everyone needs baby clothes or more 'stuff'. If you'd like to contribute directly, I've set up a link through Paypal where you can do so. Thanks again.