4 ms·
Your university commercialization office will disagree. Check with them. From what I understand, it is illegal to release your code in CC0 or MIT unless you hav
by dproblem 7y ago
Your university commercialization office will disagree. Check with them. From what I understand, it is illegal to release your code in CC0 or MIT unless you have taken permission from the commercialization office (Some universities allow GPL without explicit permission). Have you checked your contract ? Your work is not yours if it has any value. The value belongs to the university (mostly) - which also means you have no incentive to work on valuable stuff.
I think Elsevier is least of UCs problems. It's a distraction from the real ones.
- gisely 7y agoGrad student at Berkeley. The commercialization office only takes an interest if your work is high profile enough and has enough commercialization potential. Plenty of UC researchers release CC0 or MIT license code without issue. Elsevier may be only one of many problems for the UC community, but that doesn’t mean it’s a distraction—- millions have been wasted every year subsidizing their profits. And Elsevier’s rent seeking business model is a problem for more than just the UCs. Hopefully this decision will end up being Elsevier’s death knell.
- tanakachen 7y agoTo Elsevier CEO: It Is Difficult to Get a Man to Understand Something When His Salary Depends Upon His Not Understanding It. Elsevier’s model is being disrupted and there is no going back.
- Pfhreak 7y agoAren't you assuming the risk though? Like, in practice they might not care, but in writing they could care...
- prepend 7y agoAssuming risk is part of the judgement required in science. There’s stuff that requires IRB, then there’s a whole bunch of judgement and risk.
- sitkack 7y agoAs enabled by Bayh–Dole Act [0]. Reversing this law would put publicly funded research back into the hands and minds of the public. This is the very law that creates a perverse incentive for universities to operate as for profit corporations, even with public dollars. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh%E2%80%93Dole_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh%E2%80%93Dole_Act
- bahmboo 7y agoWouldn't that just put it back in the hands of the Federal Gov where it would languish like it did before?
- richardwhiuk 7y agoWork produced by the Federal Government are usually automatically in the public domain.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- dproblem 7y agoClarification: This thread is referring to work funded by the Federal Government (not done by Federal Government). And I would agree with @sitkak - that perhaps that BD act needs to be cut down - for starters. But we do need more to fix Universities.
- solidsnack9000 7y agoSurprised that you were downvoted because this was actually the problem that led to the act: IP for work done for the federal government (not by the federal government) was often difficult to make use of. Those seeking to use government-owned technology found a maze of rules and regulations set out by the agencies in question because there was no uniform federal policy on patents for government-sponsored inventions or on the transfer of technology from the government to the private sector.
- 7y ago
- ljosa 7y agoAs a grad student at UCSB, it only took a single email to get formal permission to release all my code under the BSD license.
- naniwaduni 7y agoBut did it include clause 3?
- tingletech 7y agoFWIW, UC's open source guidelines https://security.ucop.edu/resources/open-source-software-licensing.html https://security.ucop.edu/resources/open-source-software-lic...
- tstactplsignore 7y agoGrad student at Berkeley for 3+ years. I've never heard of anyone mention or discuss this before among many people constantly publishing reasonably valuable code under open source licenses.