Numeribib: The day will be a truly HAL open archive ...

[From Google's English] "Here's a perspective that, if it were implemented, would allow HAL to become a fully open archive. Let us recall that, currently, the default license that applies to items deposited in HAL under the right of 'classic' author. This means that no reuse of items is possible without the express consent of the authors. This is often translated by 'all rights reserved' [for authors]. It is an opening data sham: HAL may well be described as 'open' archive, reusing items is blocked. The HAL archive was designed to 'direct scientific communication', not for direct reuse, and, despite the principle of open data, repeatedly reaffirmed  since the declaration of the 'Budapest Open Access Initiative' 2001 . Licenses Creative Commons is a reversal of the logic of copyright. It is no longer a prohibition on reuse expressed a priori , rather it is a permission given by the author, subject to compliance with certain covenants. This is often translated by 'some rights reserved'. Permission to reuse becomes the rule bans the exception. Licenses Creative Commons  is therefore a perfect tool to ensure a real opening data. Two central issues surrounding the prospect of an implementation license Creative Commons in HAL. One legal, the other political ... Which Creative Commons license is preferred? CC-BY-NC or CC-BY-SA ?  clause 'NC ' (' Non Commercial ') has the purpose to block commercial reuse. In a recent article , Pierre-Carl Langlais shows although it is quite unrealistic to prevent this type of reuse. For commercial exploitation is protean and not be apprehended by a simple definition. It does not necessarily translate into a financial transaction. In the case of scientific social networks (ResearchGate, OpenScience, MyScienceWork, etc.), registration is free and members file or consult articles through the provision of personal data. We know the formula: 'If it's free, you are the product.' But if it's free, is it a commercial property ? ... The autonomy of researchers is an inviolable principle (in France). It is therefore no question of imposing a standard license for all content posted on HAL.  Require all researchers a unique type of open license would be possible on the basis of legislation ad hoc . Germany has recently legislated to that effect .   Rather than waiting for a hypothetical change in the legislative framework, or less display a clear ministerial commitment , there would be a simple way for SDCC to encourage researchers to deposit their articles in HAL under license Creative Commons  ..."