Subject: Re: PostGutenberg Copyrights and Wrongs for Give-Away Research From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 11:58:38 -0400 |
Im America, the "codification" of which Stevan speaks must not be called a property right. It is an artificial monopoly that may be granted (or for that matter, denied) by Congress within very important parameters. The "giveaway/nongiveaway" distinction serves a political purpose, while it must be stressed that in the area of copyright, it fails to emphasize that we are speaking of an artificial grant of exclusive rights to "expression" per se, as opposed to any creation of a "property" right to information. Seth Johnson Stevan Harnad wrote: > > theft of text > > owning [. . .] one's "text's authorship" rather than > one's "intellectual property" or one's "moral rights" > -- for the give-away texts (mainly research reports, > before and after peer review) with which this Forum > is concerned. > > Changing one's vocabulary helps, but alas it is no > substitute for understanding and thinking clearly. > And for that, I find the giveaway/nongiveaway > distinction far, far more important -- yet hitherto > completely unmarked with a terminological distinction > of its own. -- [CC] Counter-copyright: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of exclusive rights.
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: PostGutenberg Copyrights and Wr, Stevan Harnad | Thread | Re: Who owns the rights? BY Arnold , Olga Francois |
In The News, Olga Francois | Date | Re:Digital Rights- Syllabus, Online, Siegfried Angerer |
Month |