Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org)Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org)Posted Aug 28, 2012 18:46 UTC (Tue) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)In reply to: Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) by grantingram Parent article: Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org)
but you aren't just preventing the graphs from being used in other academic works.
you are preventing them from being used by bloggers who think you have something important to say and want to use your graph on their blog.
and you are preventing a newspaper from printing your graph as part of a story.
you are preventing someone from using your graph in a powerpoint presentation to some audience that would never take the time to go find and read your academic paper on their own.
Are all these limits really worth whatever benefits you think you are getting by using copyright to prevent other researchers from trying to pass your research off as their own? (which would not be allowed anyway with the attribution requirements)
(Log in to post comments)
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 28, 2012 19:02 UTC (Tue) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
You CAN use a graph from some paper under CC-ND with proper attribution, that's covered by fair use.
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 28, 2012 20:20 UTC (Tue) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link]
Not all jurisdictions have fair use.
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 28, 2012 20:55 UTC (Tue) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
Then introduce provisions for it in the license text.
BTW, what jurisdictions actually forbid citations for academic purposes?
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 28, 2012 21:53 UTC (Tue) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
What jurisdictions forbid academic citation? The UK for one, I'm pretty certain!
In jurisdictions without fair use, the law tends to be black and white. Even a quote is - technically - a copyright violation. And while I vaguely remember something about the law changing recently, as far as I am aware, ANY copying without explicit permission of one form or another is a copyright violation in the UK.
Oh - and as to the person going on about libel and misrepresentation - you are not considering other countries. The US and UK are diametrically opposed in their implementation of libel law ... what works in one is highly unlikely to work in the other. And in the UK libel law is *totally* *ineffective* for, let's say, 95% of the population.
Cheers,
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 28, 2012 22:30 UTC (Tue) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
So how do academics work in the UK?
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 29, 2012 7:55 UTC (Wed) by njwhite (subscriber, #51848) [Link]
> So how do academics work in the UK?
The same way they do elsewhere. I don't know Wol's claim on the illegality of citation is true, but in practise it's treated sensibly; quoting a limited amount, with attribution, is expected and practised widely.
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 29, 2012 12:56 UTC (Wed) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
"treated sensibly". Of course.
If an academic sued for copyright violation because another academic quoted him without permission, he'd probably win.
But in the long (and even short) term he'd probably lose big as his career tanked. Academics live by other academics quoting them. So even if it's technically illegal they can't sue as it would be professional death.
Cheers,
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 29, 2012 7:52 UTC (Wed) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link]
I'm not aware of any jurisdictions that forbid citations (but IANAL, etc), but re-using a graph wouldn't be considered citation in the fields I'm familiar with.
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 29, 2012 16:20 UTC (Wed) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
Citing a graph from a paper is fine in my field (biotechnology), if this graph is a subject for further analysis, for example.
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 28, 2012 20:26 UTC (Tue) by bjartur (subscriber, #67801) [Link]
In what jurisdictions?
Do note that states write their own copyright exceptions. My state, The Republic of Iceland, allows* unlimited verbatim copying for private non-commercial use. I reckon some don't.
* This does now not apply to protected (DRM'd) software. Thank you, EEA.
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 29, 2012 16:31 UTC (Wed) by grantingram (guest, #18390) [Link] Are all these limits really worth whatever benefits you think you are getting by using copyright to prevent other researchers from trying to pass your research off as their own? (which would not be allowed anyway with the attribution requirements)Those are good arguments for allowing derivative works of academic graphs - my point was re-use of articles doesn't help research work much. I'm not convinced that copyright gives academic authors a net benefit at all. In practise people will use your graphs in their powerpoint presentation even if you put "all rights reserved". I am however a big fan of reading the license that you put your work under and standing by it! So if you think that "re-mixing" academic publications is a bad idea allowing it in the license you use to publish is sending the wrong message.
|
|||||||||||||