[NEW] Download Gratis Access

When the Bethesda and Berlin statements came out (June and October 2003) they followed the Budapest statement in calling for the removal of both price and permission barriers. As a result, all three components of the Budapest-Bethesda-Berlin (BBB) definition of OA now call for both sorts of free online access.

~peters/fos/bethesda.htm

-berlin/berlindeclaration.html

On this new terminology, the BBB definition describes one kind of libre OA. A typical funder or university mandate requires gratis OA. Many OA journals provide libre OA, but many others provide only gratis OA.

Download Gratis Access

Download File 🔥 https://fancli.com/2y4P1k 🔥

No. The green/gold distinction is about venues (repositories and journals), while the gratis/libre distinction is about user rights or freedoms. Green OA can be gratis or libre, but is usually gratis. Gold OA can be gratis or libre, but is also usually gratis.

Micro Free (formerly M100 Free) includes read-only access to critical microbiology standards. These standards are essential for better patient outcomes and reducing antimicrobial resistance. CLSI is committed to making resources broadly available to users around the globe to save lives and improve patient health.

ChatGPT Alpha is an experimental release of ChatGPT. Alpha access is available to testers and those who have applied for it. As for the features you mentioned, like uploading images, files, and generating images using DALLE-3, Currently the Alpha do not support all this.

A registered personal account is a free account that enables you to access, cite, and return to JSTOR content. Your personal account may support your research in a variety of ways depending on your role and affiliations, including:

The English adjective free is commonly used in one of two meanings: "at no monetary cost" (gratis) and "with little or no restriction" (libre). This ambiguity of free can cause issues where the distinction is important, as it often is in dealing with laws concerning the use of information, such as copyright and patents.

The terms gratis and libre may be used to categorise intellectual property like computer programs, according to the licenses and legal restrictions that cover them, especially in the free software and open source communities, as well as the broader free culture movement. For example, they are used to distinguish freeware (software gratis) from free software (software libre).

Libre /libr/ in English is adopted from the various Romance languages, ultimately descending from the Latin word lber; its origin is closely related to liberty. It denotes "the state of being free", as in "liberty" or "having freedom". The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) considers libre to be obsolete,[2] but the word has come back into limited[a] use. Unlike gratis, libre appears in few English dictionaries,[a] although there is no other English single-word adjective signifying "liberty" exclusively, without also meaning "at no monetary cost".

With the advent of the free software movement, license schemes were created to give developers more freedom in terms of code sharing, commonly called open source or free and open-source software (called FLOSS, FOSS, or F/OSS). As the English adjective free does not distinguish between "for free" and "liberty", the phrases "free as in freedom of speech" (libre, free software) and "free as in free beer" (gratis, freeware) were adopted. Many in the free software movement feel strongly about the freedom to use the software, make modifications, etc., whether or not this freely usable software is to be exchanged for money. Therefore, this distinction became important.

"Free software" means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. Thus, "free software" is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of "free" as in "free speech," not as in "free beer". We sometimes call it "libre software," borrowing the French or Spanish word for "free" as in freedom, to show we do not mean the software is gratis.

These phrases have become common, along with gratis and libre, in the software development and computer law fields for encapsulating this distinction.[b] The distinction is similar to the distinction made in political science between positive liberty and negative liberty. Like "free beer", positive liberty promises equal access by all without cost or regard to income, of a given good (assuming the good exists). Like "free speech", negative liberty safeguards the right to use of something (in this case, speech) without regard to whether in a given case there is a cost involved for this use.[c]

In order to reflect real-world differences in the degree of open access, the distinction between gratis open access and libre open access was added in 2006 by Peter Suber and Stevan Harnad, two of the co-drafters of the original Budapest Open Access Initiative definition of open access publishing.[4] Gratis open access refers to online access free of charge (which Wikipedia indicates with the icon ), and libre open access refers to online access free of charge plus some additional re-use rights (Wikipedia icon ).[4] Libre open access is equivalent to the definition of open access in the Budapest Open Access Initiative, the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities. The re-use rights of libre OA are often specified by various specific Creative Commons licenses;[5] these almost all require attribution of authorship to the original authors.[4][6]

The original gratis/libre distinction concerns software (i.e., code), with which users can potentially do two[citation needed] kinds of things: 1. access and use it; and 2. modify and re-use it. "Gratis" pertains to being able to access and use the code, without a price-barrier, while "libre" pertains to being allowed to modify and re-use the code, without a permission barrier. The target content of the open access movement, however, is not software but published, peer-reviewed research journal article texts.[citation needed]

Open access (OA) is a set of principles and a range of practices through which research outputs are distributed online, free of access charges or other barriers.[1] With open access strictly defined (according to the 2001 definition), or libre open access, barriers to copying or reuse are also reduced or removed by applying an open license for copyright.[1]

The main focus of the open access movement is "peer reviewed research literature".[2] Historically, this has centered mainly on print-based academic journals. Whereas non-open access journals cover publishing costs through access tolls such as subscriptions, site licenses or pay-per-view charges, open-access journals are characterised by funding models which do not require the reader to pay to read the journal's contents, relying instead on author fees or on public funding, subsidies and sponsorships. Open access can be applied to all forms of published research output, including peer-reviewed and non peer-reviewed academic journal articles, conference papers, theses,[3] book chapters,[1] monographs,[4] research reports and images.[5]

Different open access types are currently commonly described using a colour system. The most commonly recognised names are "green", "gold", and "hybrid" open access; however, several other models and alternative terms are also used.

Many gold OA publishers charge an article processing charge (APC), which is typically paid through institutional or grant funding. The majority of gold open access journals charging APCs follow an "author-pays" model,[10]although this is not an intrinsic property of gold OA.[11]

Green OA is gratis for the author. Some publishers (less than 5% and decreasing as of 2014) may charge a fee for an additional service[12] such as a free license on the publisher-authored copyrightable portions of the printed version of an article.

Hybrid open-access journals contain a mixture of open access articles and closed access articles.[13][14] A publisher following this model is partially funded by subscriptions, and only provide open access for those individual articles for which the authors (or research sponsor) pay a publication fee.[15] Hybrid OA generally costs more than gold OA and can offer a lower quality of service.[16] A particularly controversial practice in hybrid open access journals is "double dipping", where both authors and subscribers are charged.[17] For these reasons, Hybrid Open Access journals have been called a "Mephistophelian invention",[18] and publishing in Hybrid OA journals is not considered as meeting the open access mandate.[19]

Journals that publish open access without charging authors article processing charges are sometimes referred to as diamond[21][22][23] or platinum[24][25] OA. Since they do not charge either readers or authors directly, such publishers often require funding from external sources such as the sale of advertisements, academic institutions, learned societies, philanthropists or government grants.[26][27][28] There are now over 350 platinum OA journals with impact factors over a wide variety of academic disciplines, giving most academics options for OA with no APCs.[29] Diamond OA journals are available for most disciplines, and are usually small (

The growth of unauthorized digital copying by large-scale copyright infringement has enabled free access to paywalled literature.[31][32] This has been done via existing social media sites (e.g. the #ICanHazPDF hashtag) as well as dedicated sites (e.g. Sci-Hub).[31] In some ways this is a large-scale technical implementation of pre-existing practice, whereby those with access to paywalled literature would share copies with their contacts.[33][34][35][36] However, the increased ease and scale from 2010 onwards have changed how many people treat subscription publications.[37] e24fc04721