summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html')
-rw-r--r--talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html140
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 140 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html
deleted file mode 100644
index 38f0314..0000000
--- a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,140 +0,0 @@
-<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
-
-Free Software Foundation
-
-51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor
-
-Boston, MA 02110-1335
-Copyright C 2002, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
-Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire book are permitted
-worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is
-preserved. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations
-of this book from the original English into another language provided
-the translation has been approved by the Free Software Foundation and
-the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on all
-copies.
-
-ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
-Cover design by Rob Myers.
-
-Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- -->
-
-
- <a name="Science-Must-Push-Copyright-Aside">
- </a>
- <h1 class="chapter">
- 19. Science Must Push Copyright Aside
- </h1>
- <a name="index-libraries_002c-access-fees-and">
- </a>
- <p>
- It should be a truism that the scientific literature exists to
-disseminate scientific knowledge, and that scientific journals exist
-to facilitate the process. It therefore follows that rules for use of
-the scientific literature should be designed to help achieve that
-goal.
- </p>
- <p>
- The rules we have now, known as copyright, were established in the
-age of the printing press, an inherently centralized method of
-mass-production copying. In a print environment, copyright on journal
-articles restricted only journal publishers—requiring them to
-obtain permission to publish an article—and would-be
-plagiarists. It helped journals to operate and disseminate knowledge,
-without interfering with the useful work of scientists or students,
-either as writers or readers of articles. These rules fit that system
-well.
- </p>
- <p>
- The modern technology for scientific publishing, however, is the
-World Wide Web. What rules would best ensure the maximum
-dissemination of scientific articles, and knowledge, on the web?
-Articles should be distributed in nonproprietary formats, with open
-access for all. And everyone should have the right to
-“mirror” articles—that is, to republish them verbatim
-with proper attribution.
- </p>
- <p>
- These rules should apply to past as well as future articles, when
-they are distributed in electronic form. But there is no crucial need
-to change the present copyright system as it applies to paper
-publication of journals because the problem is not in that domain.
- </p>
- <p>
- Unfortunately, it seems that not everyone agrees with the truisms
-that began this article. Many journal publishers appear to believe
-that the purpose of scientific literature is to enable them to publish
-journals so as to collect subscriptions from scientists and
-students. Such thinking is known as “confusion of the means with
-the ends.”
- </p>
- <p>
- Their approach has been to restrict access even to read the
-scientific literature to those who can and will pay for it. They use
-copyright law, which is still in force despite its inappropriateness
-for computer networks, as an excuse to stop scientists from choosing
-new rules.
- </p>
- <p>
- For the sake of scientific cooperation and humanity’s future, we
-must reject that approach at its root—not merely the
-obstructive systems that have been instituted, but the mistaken
-priorities that inspired them.
- </p>
- <p>
- Journal publishers sometimes claim that online access requires
-expensive high-powered server machines, and that they must charge
-access fees to pay for these servers. This “problem” is a
-consequence of its own “solution.” Give everyone the
-freedom to mirror, and libraries around the world will set up mirror
-sites to meet the demand. This decentralized solution will reduce
-network bandwidth needs and provide faster access, all the while
-protecting the scholarly record against accidental loss.
- </p>
- <p>
- Publishers also argue that paying the editors requires charging for
-access. Let us accept the assumption that editors must be paid; this
-tail need not wag the dog. The cost of editing for a typical paper is
-between 1 percent and 3 percent of the cost of funding the research to produce
-it. Such a small percentage of the cost can hardly justify obstructing
-the use of the results.
- </p>
- <a name="index-universities-3">
- </a>
- <p>
- Instead, the cost of editing could be recovered, for example,
-through page charges to the authors, who can pass these on to the
-research sponsors. The sponsors should not mind, given that they
-currently pay for publication in a more cumbersome way, through
-overhead fees for the university library’s subscription to the
-journal. By changing the economic model to charge editing costs to the
-research sponsors, we can eliminate the apparent need to restrict
-access. The occasional author who is not affiliated with an
-institution or company, and who has no research sponsor, could be
-exempted from page charges, with costs levied on institution-based
-authors.
- </p>
- <p>
- Another justification for access fees to online publications is to
-fund conversion of the print archives of a journal into online
-form. That work needs to be done, but we should seek alternative ways
-of funding it that do not involve obstructing access to the
-result. The work itself will not be any more difficult, or cost any
-more. It is self-defeating to digitize the archives and waste the
-results by restricting access.
- </p>
- <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-defend-progress-of-science-from-copyright">
- </a>
- <p>
- The
- <a name="index-Constitution_002c-copyright-and-US-2">
- </a>
- US Constitution says that copyright exists “to promote
-the Progress of Science.” When copyright impedes the progress of
-science, science must push copyright out of the way.
- <a name="index-libraries_002c-access-fees-and-1">
- </a>
- </p>
- <hr size="2"/>
-