Robert Harington comments on a New York Times article by Kate Murphy , published on Sunday 13th March, 2016, suggesting that when journalists write such an article they, do not fan the flames of fundamentalism, recognize the complexity at hand, and understand that there is a constructive debate to be had.
The New York Public Library has now opened up hundreds of thousands of their digitized public-domain documents to unrestricted access and reuse, encouraging members the general public to exercise all the rights in those documents that the law gives them. Why aren’t more academic libraries doing the same thing?
Google wins in court (again) as the Second Circuit of Appeals rules that its mass book digitization program qualifies as fair use. But Google is a commercial entity! And their files might get hacked! And their library partners are even more susceptible to copyright pirates than Google is! Yes, said the court, but. . .
The photographer who got picked on by Wikimedia over his photo of a Back Crested Macaque, resulting in a claim of public domain for the image, has now been sued by PETA who claim that the monkey should hold the copyright and that he should pay damages. You couldn’t make it up.
Is access to the research paper really the same thing as access to the research results themselves? Are funding agencies creating a false equivalency by confusing the two? And does this confusion favor researchers in some fields over others? Revisiting a 2013 post to re-examine these questions.
Home movies from an unlikely source.
Guest Chef Bryn Geffert (Librarian of the College at Amherst College) tries to envision a world in which publishers can spend less time and money wrestling with copyright issues and scholars can more effectively share their work.
The International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers recently launched a consultation, requesting feedback from all stakeholders about their draft principles on article sharing on scholarly communication networks. Find out more about how and why these principles are needed and what the consultation hopes to achieve, n this interview with Fred Dylla, Executive Director and CEO of the American Institute of Physics, and project lead for the initiative.
The Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) meeting in Europe is 10 years old, but feels as fresh and frisky as some of the meetings in the US used to. This report touches on some of the most interesting threads of two days’ worth of interesting presentations and conversations.
A Spanish court’s decision around Google News suggests that the barter arrangement with Google and other general search engines — in which they pay nothing to license our content — may have a more viable financial future.
Are we all talking about the same thing when we say “open access” — and do we all mean the same thing when we talk about an “open access future”? Short answers: “yes (kind of)” and “no way.”
With the appellate court’s rejection of the district court’s decision in the Georgia State University fair-use case, we have yet another twist in this six-year-long saga of copyright litigation. It’s clearly a setback for GSU–but what about for fair use?
Monkey Copyright… of all the juxtapositions of words; I never thought I’d be entering that particular two word combination into Google. This particular search combo was prompted by (what else) a selection of updates in my twitter feed about a […]
The emergence of the Authors Alliance is causing consternation among some members of the traditional publishing community, most notably the Authors Guild, which has already issued a sharply-worded critique. But what is the Alliance actually going to do? They’re not really saying.
Axiomatically more complicated than copyright, built to provide no legal cover, and possibly put in place by the technocrats in Silicon Valley, does Creative Commons make sense for the creative class?