[open-science] Copyright consultation

Fri Mar 16 12:05:14 UTC 2012

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Peter Bradwell
<peter at openrightsgroup.org>wrote:

> Dear Peter
>
> Many thanks for this.
>
> Fantastic to hear from you and it's great to hear about your work on this
> issue. And of course always glad to be introduced to someone who knows of
> ORG and Becky!
>
> I'll be fascinated to see the responses from publishers. That is a great
> idea.
>

see http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr within last two weeks

>
> I'd be delighted to swap drafts, although this depends slightly on my
> ability to get it written quickly enough - I'm not forgoing science work
> this weekend, but instead missing friend's birthday celebrations!
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Pete
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 15 March 2012 18:49, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> Many thanks Peter,
>> I know ORG well, especially through Becky Hogge.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Peter Bradwell <
>> peter at action.openrightsgroup.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Peter
>>>
>>> First of all please let me apologise for contacting you out of the blue.
>>> I felt inspired to get in touch with you by the recent action over
>>> Elsevier's position on access to journals. Open Rights Group, where I work,
>>> is focused on related issues.
>>>
>>> Given you signed the Cost of Knowledge petition, I would like to draw
>>> your attention to an ongoing and, in our opinion, very important review of
>>> UK copyright law.
>>>
>>
>> I am copying in my OKF colleagues (Open Knowledge Foundation) as we are
>> also preparing a response to Hargreaves. My recent activities have been to
>> approach publishers with requests for text-mining. I am publishing their
>> responses. Most of them requires me to get their permission (which I find
>> unacceptable
>>
>>>
>>> From the perspective of users of copyright works this the first major
>>> revision of copyright in over twenty years – in fact the first revision
>>> since Tim Berners-Lee wrote the first internet browser in 1990. It is
>>> perhaps an understatement to say that much has changed because of this in
>>> the way that we access knowledge.
>>>
>>> The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) is currently consulting on a
>>> range of measures to make the law reflect  modern day technology with
>>> particular relevance to academics.  However many of the recommendations are
>>> being opposed by the publishing and entertainment industries, and it is
>>> therefore important that the voice of academics is heard. We have produced
>>> a brief guide to the issues<http://www.openrightsgroup.org/assets/files/files/pdfs/Hargreaves%20Helpers.pdf> for
>>> those responding from education and research perspectives, and have pulled
>>> out the full list of consultation questions<http://www.openrightsgroup.org/assets/files/files/pdfs/Hargreaves%20Consultation%20Questions.pdf>
>>> .
>>>
>>> These will be very useful to my colleagues. BTW I was invited to talk
>> with Ben Hawes at the IPO.
>>
>>
>>>  The suggested amendments include proposals to:
>>>
>>>    - Allow non-commercial researchers to text and data mine material
>>>    they have lawful access to (e.g. the web / subscribed to journal databases
>>>    etc). (on page 79-82 of the consultation, and addressed in question 77)
>>>    - Allow digital archiving. (p.70-72 / Q.72)
>>>    - Extend research copying (“fair dealing”) to sound and film, and
>>>    allow librarians to make copies on behalf of researchers. (p.74 – 77 / Q.75)
>>>    - Widen the existing copyright exception for quotation to allow
>>>    information, analysis, argument or comment. (p.105 / Q.94.)
>>>    - Facilitate mass digitisation of post 1870 in-copyright materials,
>>>    including works whose copyright owner cannot be found (“orphan works”.)
>>>    (p.14 – 39 / Q.1 – 43)
>>>    - Update the existing copyright exceptions for educational
>>>    establishments and teaching.(p.89-95 / Q.85-89)
>>>    - Make sure that none of these amendments, or existing exceptions in
>>>    copyright law are “over-ridden” and negated by contracts entered into by
>>>    individuals or university libraries.(p.116-119 / Q.103)
>>>
>>> The consultation ends on the 21st March. The consultation document can
>>> be found online:
>>> http://www.ipo.gov.uk/pro-policy/consult/consult-live/consult-2011-copyright.htm
>>>
>>> Responses do not have to be long and you can select which questions you
>>> respond to. Responses from individuals are welcome and the quoting of
>>> evidence (economic, anecdotal etc) to support arguments is particularly
>>> valuable.
>>>
>>> If you do choose to respond, send your submission by the 21st March
>>> (next Wednesday) to: copyrightconsultation at ipo.gov.uk
>>>
>>>
>>> We would like to reiterate that in the face of vocal opposition it is
>>> important the voice of the education and research sector is heard - we
>>> consider this to be a once in a generation opportunity to update copyright
>>> law.
>>>
>>
>> Yes. I am very conscious that we pay the publishers (through
>> subscriptions) who then employ staff to prevent us doing things. The
>> publishers make an apparently persuasive case - "always being helpfule". In
>> fact they aren't and part of our task is to pull together evidence to show
>> that they have prevaricated, flannelled, and in some areas are incompetent
>> (not knowing the difference between copyright and contract - BTW it is the
>> contracts that current stop me working - the libraries have signed many of
>> our current rights to the publishers.
>>
>> This is my weekend's fun - fighting the publishers rather than doing
>> science.
>>
>>>
>>> Finally, if you are interested in staying in touch regarding these and
>>> similar digital policy issues, do let me know. We have an academic mailing
>>> list that you could join.
>>>
>>> and vice versa.
>>
>>
>>> Many thanks once again for your time.
>>>
>>> We should swap drafts
>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Peter Bradwell
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Peter Murray-Rust
>> Reader in Molecular Informatics
>> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
>> University of Cambridge
>> CB2 1EW, UK
>> +44-1223-763069
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Open Rights Group <http://www.openrightsgroup.org/>
> m: 07811 268398 | Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/peterbradwell>
>
>

-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20120316/5b098f61/attachment-0001.html>