[Humanist] 26.611 open-access; metrics

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Thu Dec 20 10:35:06 CET 2012


                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 26, No. 611.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                              www.dhhumanist.org/
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org

  [1]   From:    "Noiret, Serge" <Serge.Noiret at EUI.eu>                     (40)
        Subject: RE:  26.604 open-access

  [2]   From:    Patrick Durusau <patrick at durusau.net>                     (26)
        Subject: Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics


--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:54:39 +0000
        From: "Noiret, Serge" <Serge.Noiret at EUI.eu>
        Subject: RE:  26.604 open-access
        In-Reply-To: <20121219065609.2B9C730A9 at digitalhumanities.org>

Thank you Miran for this thoughtful and acute reflection: Wikipedia being the metaphor of our changing world through digital media.

I always wondered why, in the context of non-commercial activities in the world of digital publishing, and even when not referring to the CC open licenses, you have to be so scared and so prudent. As an individual author or with a collective authorship enterprise like Wikipedia and derivate, I would opt for a simple sentence connected to the image you publish online.

Why ? Reproducing an image from other digital contexts is de facto "quoting" a digital resource: the hypertext may be made of links to a resource or made of resources embedded directly in the new structure and with a caption linking back to the origin of the information re-published. This is what is important in the digital world: acknowledging the origin of the document, the source of the information. This is what is often being lost.

I would acknowledge the original context, saying

"picture-image (etc.) published by x –if known-

name of the author xx –if known-

from the following web site xxx

at URL xxxx"

(or something similar) and I would add, starting the post/essay/article etc.:

"The purpose of this post (essay, article, etc.) is not commercial and the author was not aware, when publishing it, if the image reproduced infringe or not some specific copyright law.

We –new publisher- would be happy to pay the requested fee or remove the image from the publication if told about and requested to follow unknown copyright law.”

Would this candid and also honest declaration, avoid a lot of worries and leave space for authors or owners of specific copyrights to manifest themselves arguing against the publication or the way/context it has been published ? Would this be fair enough ? Nobody has really any interest to proceed with a judicial case in such a context and gentleman’s agreements could be easily found. But again why this should happen for individual, academic, scientific publications in OA and not for profit activities ?

In my opinion -and without entering the copyrights jungle (different everywhere)-, who’s creating new contents openly and with no intention to act as a criminal, would not be stopped to be participative, creative and present in the open web. She/he would leave a door open to potential owners of unknown rights to act and ask for fees or removal or different captions/quotations etc.?

By the way is this not what is daily happening in the context of the digital social networks without any link to the source of the information published ? So why Wikipedians should behave even worse than commercial editors ?


Serge Noiret
History Information Specialist, (Ph.D.)
The Library - European University Institute
Badia Fiesolana, Via dei Roccettini 9
50014 SAN DOMENICO
Florence - Italy

>+39-0554685-348
>serge.noiret at eui.eu
>@sergenoiret
>sergenoiret.blogspot.it
>European History Primary Sources



--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:51:44 -0500
        From: Patrick Durusau <patrick at durusau.net>
        Subject: Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics
        In-Reply-To: <20121219065609.2B9C730A9 at digitalhumanities.org>


Willard,

A recent paper that may be of interest to committees that rely on 
ranking data:

Manipulating Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics: 
simple, easy and tempting.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.0638

The title serves as a sufficient summary.

Not that manipulation of citations is new, but the traditional method 
was to re-order the authors and the paper to some degree and then 
re-publish. Here the papers were only posted to a project website. 
Skipping the formal publication step.

I first saw this at Michael Mitzenmacher's blog, My Biased Coin, 
http://mybiasedcoin.blogspot.com/2012/12/put-this-on-my-list.html.

Hope you are having a great week!

Patrick http://www.blogger.com/profile/02161161032642563814 

-- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick at durusau.net
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
Former Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau





More information about the Humanist mailing list