I would like to know what license needs to be chosen in arXiv for a paper that is to be sent to an IEEE journal, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS).

Arxiv licenses:

  1. non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article.
  2. Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0).
  3. Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license (CC BY-SA 4.0).
  4. Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).
  5. Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication (CC0 1.0).

I read numerous pages like A, B, and C, but I didn't find my answer.

  • 1
    Arxiv has a minimal license option. If any of them work, that's the one.
    – Thomas
    Commented Apr 3, 2018 at 14:55

3 Answers 3


I am no lawyer and I have not read the complete legalese, but as far as I see, the first option (non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article) is the only possible valid one, as it is the most restrictive.

All the Creative Commons licenses would allow others to distribute a copy of your paper (with attribution and some possible restrictions, such as the non-commercial clause). However the IEEE policy allows only the following:

  • Author’s personal website
  • Author’s employer’s website
  • arXiv.org
  • Funder’s repository

[...] The posted article must be removed from any other third-party servers.

So using a CC license would result in a conflict, as you cannot both allow others to distribute copies while at the same time guaranteeing to the IEEE that there will be no copies on other servers.

This does not guarantee that the first option is the right one, however since the IEEE explicitly allows arXiv.org and we have excluded all the others, they will probably not complain...

  • Is the first option the most restrictive or the least restrictive?
    – Nobody
    Commented Apr 6, 2018 at 5:19
  • 3
    I would call it the most restrictive, as the author gives away the least amount rights to others.
    – mlk
    Commented Apr 6, 2018 at 7:55
  • This might be relevant after the OP has signed away their rights.
    – einpoklum
    Commented Nov 29, 2018 at 8:54

Prevent IEEE access restrictions - Don't use option 1

The IEEE's ability to legally restrict access is based on having exclusive rights, which they take from you by strong-arming you into signing those away.

The solution is using the standard trick: to actually grant the relevant rights beforehand to someone else - without losing them yourself - so that when you sign the IEEE copyright form, there will be someone else to give you the rights back afterwards. That's why you should choose one of the last three options, never the first one.

Recommendation: CC-BY-SA

Personally, I would tend not to restrict commercial use from the get-go. It's tempting, but when you think about it - the social damage from having to go through you for economic use of your findings is probably higher than the benefit of sticking it to the large corporations or what-not.

As for public domain - I'd be against it, since attribution is important not just to you but also for academic/scientific work. So, wanna use my paper? Citation please.

Non-SA licenses: I would be worried about derivative work being non-free.

To be honest, though, this isn't a strong recommendation and all three are fine by me I guess.


Coming very late and just having the same problem, https://conferences.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/get-published/post-your-paper/#preprint says

Upon acceptance of the paper by IEEE, the author must replace the posted preprint paper with either (1) the full citation to the IEEE work with the DOI, or (2) the accepted version of the paper with the DOI and an appropriate copyright notice (as described in the “Accepted paper” section below). No other changes may be made to the accepted paper.

It seems to me that IEEE does not (anymore?) restrict the freedom to choose any of the five licensing options for the preprint. However, if one chooses to upload the IEEE accepted version to arXiv, an "appropriate copyright notice" must be added (apparently the one agreed with IEEE). I understand that if you upload the accepted version then you'd have to choose option 1 (the most restrictive one) to remain consistent.

(I'm also not a lawyer, but hope that helps.)

  • For the rest, I agree with the other answers.
    – mfg
    Commented Apr 16 at 12:30

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .