[ The following text is in the "UTF-8" character set. ]
[ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
"allow people to walk through your field"
Orwell would have liked this new meaning
of "mandate"
and what about the crops on my field? Can
we mandate that we will have the right to
take that also, in the name of common good?
Without much success I have compared
"mandates" with Stalin's collectivization.
Instead to sell on a market You have to
sell it to the state. In our case to the people
that finance your activities on the field.
What emerged during the first years of the
sad French revolution was the abolishing
of all author rights for the good of all. During
the sad Russian one, you even lost your field.
What is emerging during the OA Revolution?
The same mistakes as usual.
Jan
Jean-Claude Guédon wrote:
> I have read John Ewing's (superficial) article about copyright and
> must report that I have not learned a thing I did not already know. I
> should also add that Mr. Ewing's use of the term copyright for
> mid-eighteenth France is completely faulty: there was no copyright in
> France at the time, only King's "privileges". Moreover, when the Old
> Regime disappeared with the Revolution, what emerged were "author's
> rights", not copyright. It is in the tradition of authors' rights that
> "moral rights" evolved, for example.
>
> I repeat: copyright and OA are not - repeat *not* in conflict.
> Copyright is a legal framework protecting the author while OA relies
> on permissions granted by rights' owners. Owners are free not to cling
> to all of their rights.
>
> Let me give you an example: if you own a field, you have property
> rights, including the right to prevent people from trespassing.
> However, you can also allow people to walk through your field without
> penalty and without your losing your ownership rights.
>
> OA (and Creative Commons provisions) rest on this kind of thinking.
>
> I hope this clarifies the point for you.
>
> Best,
>
> Jean-Claude Guédon
>
> Le mardi 04 décembre 2007 ? 08:45 +0100, Jan Szczepanski a écrit :
> > I would recommend Mr Guédon to read John Ewings
> > article "Copyright and authors" in First Monday
> > http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_10/ewing/
> >
> > I would say that we are in the same situation as in France
> > 1788-89 by "optimizing mandates"
> >
> > Citation from the article:
> >
> > "This view, however, was soon overwhelmed in 1788-89 by
> > the Revolution. In the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the
> > National Assembly officially sanctioned freedom of the press.
> > Without effective copyright, the freedom was wild and destructive.
> > Anonymous and seditious pamphlets appeared throughout the
> > country; piracy of literary works was rampant; publishers faltered
> > and became insolvent. Officials recognized the need to act, but
> > they debated endlessly, ensnared by the politics of censorship in
> > the midst of the Revolutions turmoil"
> >
> > Jan
> >
> > Jean-Claude Guédon wrote:
> > > Open Access does not work against copyright. Articles are placed into
> > > open access only with the agreement of the rights' owners. It has
> > > nothing to do with piracy. Mandates are to deposit in repositories,
> > > not publish in open access against the will of publishers. Those
> > > publishers that allow self-archiving will see the deposited articles
> > > go public. The others can be searched and identified but they cannot
> > > be read without the rights' owners' consent.
> > >
> > > No one in OA is advocating breaking the law.
> > >
> > > As a result, I do not know how your remark fits with Open Access.
> > >
> > > On a different issue, the present system of scientific publishing in
> > > its present, concentrated mode dom inated by a few large international
> > > publishers and a few large scirntific associations is not several
> > > century old; it is about 50 years old.
> > >
> > > Jean-Claude
> > >
> > >
> > > Le lundi 03 décembre 2007 ? 08:42 +0100, Jan Szczepanski a écrit :
> > >> During the French Revolution all kinds of copyrights were abolished.
> > >> They called that freedom. That freedom was abolished a couple of
> > >> years later.
> > >>
> > >> Much of the OA-movement and the creative-common-movement
> > >> are working in that spirit and they fight for freedom but they are
> > just
> > >> trying to destroy a system working well for hundreds of years. Pirat
> > >> copying is not the future.
> > >>
> > >> We need a new Jean Le Chapeliers fighting for Les droits du génie
> > >> and not try to undermine it by "mandates".
> > >>
> > >> Jan
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Jean-Claude Guédon wrote:
> > >> > A much better way is to work with the union. Unions are not against
> > >> > open access, especially when they understand the issues. The
> > problem
> > >> > is more one of ignorance than one of hostility.
> > >> >
> > >> > Student unions can also be approached.
> > >> >
> > >> > Jean-Claude Guédon
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Le vendredi 30 novembre 2007 ? 16:55 +0000, FrederickFriend a
> > écrit :
> > >> >> Trade unions may not strike over copyright, but I still have the
> > bruises to
> > >> >> prove that copyright can cause a furore. At UCL a few years ago I
> > dared to
> > >> >> suggest that UCL might own the copyright in some of the work of
> > its academic
> > >> >> staff. I was vilified internally, the AUT (as it was then) were up
> > in arms,
> > >> >> and I was pilloried in "Private Eye" for daring to make the
> > suggestion. As
> > >> >> you can tell I survived to tell the tale, and appearing in
> > "Private Eye" did
> > >> >> wonders for my image, but don't under-estimate the seething
> > passions under
> > >> >> the calm surface of copyright.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Fred Friend
> > >> >>
> > >> >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> >> From: "J.F.Rowland_at_lboro.ac.uk <mailto:J.F.Rowland_at_lboro.ac.uk>
> > <mailto:J.F.Rowland_at_lboro.ac.uk> <mailto:J.F.Rowland_at_lboro.ac.uk>"
> > <J.F.Rowland_at_LBORO.AC.UK <mailto:J.F.Rowland_at_LBORO.AC.UK>
> > <mailto:J.F.Rowland_at_LBORO.AC.UK> <mailto:J.F.Rowland_at_LBORO.AC.UK>>
> > >> >> To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
> > <mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
> > <mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
> > <mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>>
> > >> >> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 3:57 PM
> > >> >> Subject: Re: Optimizing OA Self-Archiving Mandates
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 'the general fear of the employer about possible trade union
> > action based on
> > >> >> copyright issues relating to academic research'
> > >> >>
> > >> >> A fanciful argument. As Stevan often points out, scholarly papers
> > - the
> > >> >> subject of this forum - are not money-making propositions anyway.
> > Campus
> > >> >> trade unions and university managements have much more important
> > issues to
> > >> >> fight about. I can't imagine a strike about copyright!
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Fytton Rowland, Loughborough University, UK (President,
> > Loughborough
> > >> >> University branch of the Association of University Teachers,
> > 1999-2003)
> > >> >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
--
Jan Szczepanski
Förste bibliotekarie
Goteborgs universitetsbibliotek
Box 222
SE 405 30 Goteborg, SWEDEN
Tel: +46 31 773 1164 Fax: +46 31 163797
E-mail: Jan.Szczepanski_at_ub.gu.se
Received on Wed Dec 05 2007 - 22:54:09 GMT