Thanks to everyone for your patience with our recent conversation about disinformation. It’s extremely helpful to explore the boundaries of our understanding in this forum. We obviously have a lot more to learn about this topic, as does the global community. The point of these conversations is not to agree on everything, but to understand the different perspectives involved and recognize where there may be gaps in our understanding. The language and methods of policy and diplomacy in this subject area, in my opinion, tend to undervalue these differences and gaps and overvalue the rhetoric. So the more voices we hear the better.
Speaking of more voices, our survey numbers aren’t impressive so far. The survey has been widely distributed at this point but “qualified” participation is low---surveys completed by actual researchers. (This makes me wonder how a few previous surveys of researchers got thousands of replies. How many of these survey replies were actually spam, and/or were completed by people who chiefly worked as editors, librarians, etc.?) Of the 150 or so qualified replies so far, there are a few clear patterns, the most prominent of which is that CC-BY isn’t needed because researchers almost never need to copy and paste large chunks of text from other work (beyond what is permitted by Fair Use or Fair Dealing). Since CC-BY is a major sticking point in the selling and uptake of open policies, it may be worth revisiting the idea floated here in 2016 of a CC-EDU license---a license for research work that allows for unlimited reuse (with attribution) inside research and also for classroom teaching and education, but that prohibits commercial reuse (without permission and compensation). The CC-EDU license would be like the very popular CC-BY-NC-ND license, but more permissive with regard to research use and reuse, which aligns with the desire of all researchers to help their work be noticed and used.
Going forward, the “hidden” goal of this survey was to recruit a group of researchers who can help validate and translate OSI’s open solutions framework into actionable policy. The group of 150 survey takers is a good start (most have also volunteered to be part of this policy group) but I’ll be reaching out to a few hundred more researchers over the coming months to try to create a group of about 500, so we have adequate diversity and representation by field and region. This outreach will delay the start of our policy work by a few months but the delay will be worth it---we’ll end up with a larger, broader, stronger policy group as a result.
Thanks again everyone and best regards,