Re: Re: limits on copyright

What I see in this very experienced point of view, is even more evidence that the copyright and patent laws are hindering the progress of science. withholding scientific publications for personal gains, especially, when being paid by a State University system or tax exempt organization or using its resources, or not reporting work supported by tax exempt grants delays the science work of many, many others around the world. Those delays are costing human lives.

sterling

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Theodore L. Araujo wrote:

> When I was in-house to Cornell University and writing (with others) the Intellectual property policy for the University and it's faculty, I did not find one academic who argued for the dissolution of their copyright. What I found was a discussion that:

>
> >From the Faculties Point of View: depending on the discipline (and it mattered if they were English Professors or Professors in the Animal Science Department) the Prof. either wanted the ability to publish their research immediately (usually the scien
ces) and destroy our ability to patent the work, or have the Patents/Copyrights etc., reside only in the author/inventor, where the University would have no rights to profit from the works.
>
> The Librarians were principally concerned with increasing the size of their collections while simultaneously reducing the costs of providing the information in those collections to the students and academic public.
>
> Today, there has been a shift in priorities because those in the sciences have realized that their work could reward them with millions of dollars in royalties if they suspend publication long enough to patent their work.
>
> While in-house and in private practice only a fringe element in any discipline has ever argued for the destruction of intellectual property laws (usually those who did not produce much of value, and sought to gain access to protected materials for no fe
e.)
>
> Ted Araujo, ----- Original Message -----
> From: Freya N Anderson
> To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 3:45 PM
> Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: limits on copyright
>
>
> As a librarian, I have to jump in here. There are, no doubt, a few
> librarians who advocate the elimination of copyright altogether, just
> as some authors and publishers advocate for the elimination of the
> public domain. To say that either groups in general argue for these
> extremes is misleading.
>
> Most librarians are concerned about the erosion of the public domain,
> but while we argue against the extension of copyright terms, and many
> would like to see them rolled back somewhat, few argue that copyright
> should go away altogether. Likewise, most academics do not argue that
> copyright should disappear altogether, although they may encourage
> people to place their own works in the public domain and, like many
> librarians, argue for more reasonable copyright terms.
>
> Your proposed "solution" is interesting as well. If academics were
> truly arguing against copyright protection, wouldn't it be more
> appropriate for the money that they may have made as a result of
> copyright to be given in someway to the population at large, perhaps by
> a donation to operations of a preprint server, rather than giving the
> money to their employer? I don't think most authors are arguing that
> publishers aren't making enough from their labors, neither are
> academics arguing that institutions aren't profiting enough from their
> research.
>
> There are enough serious issues that need to be resolved without making
> the problems bigger than they are by mischaracterizing interested
> parties.
>
> Freya Anderson
>
> Jeff Sedlik wrote:
>
> >without copyright] librarians, the very folks who argue against
> >copyright protection, might just be out of a job.
> >
> > It is amusing to see professors and other academics arguing against
> > copyright protection, while at the same time cashing their
> > paychecks every
> > week. I suggest that anyone who would assert that authors should
> > not have
> > the ability to own and protect their work product should:
> >
> > (1) Add up all of the compensation that they have ever received
> > for all work
> > that they have ever done, and return the total amount to their
> > employers.(2) Refuse to accept any salary or other compensation
> > for their work, for
> > life.
> > (3) Donate all of their savings and property to their employer
> > upon their
> > deaths, thereby depriving their heirs of benefiting from a
> > lifetime of work
> >
> > Jeff Sedlik
> > Advertising Photographers of America
>
>
> #############################################################
> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org>
> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org>
> To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org>
> Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
> Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
>
Received on Thu Nov 20 2003 - 21:30:32 GMT