On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Arthur Sale <a...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
Peter
Â
To what extent does âfair-useâ over-ride the publisher wishes?
Inhttp://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/blog/fair-use/lessig-fair-use-and-open-vide
o-alliance Lessig reiterates "fair use if the right to call a lawyer".
EVERYTHING depends on the law. The law of the land trumps everything.
If I am arrested in a police station I have rights. I know them by heart - I
have been there so many times. "You have the right to remain silent". The law
and case law gives me that right.
In scholpub there are two laws:
* the law of the land. It differs by jurisdiction. There is no "fair use" in UK.
In other jurisdictions it may depend on case law or it may depend on getting a
judicial review. In scholpub there is no case law because no University would
dare to challenge the publishers - it is left to individuals (I do not expect my
University to help me in this regard)
* the law of the publishers. The publishers have set their own arbitrary law
through their contracts. You may NOT do x,y,z. There is no reason why
universities have to agree to these contracts but they universally and
comprehensively give in to the publishers. They even agree to secrecy on these
negotiations so we don't even know what they have given into.
Hargreaves has said that these contracts are unacceptable and they should be
removed. The IPO(UK) and other organs are in the process of reviewing
submissions to Hargreaves and will come up with legal instruments (not
necessarily acts of Parliament) which will (I hope) forbid restrictive
contracts.
Alicia Wise asks how she can help. Elsevier set these restrictions - Elsevier
can remove them today if they wished.
If she is true to form there will be lots of apparently helpful words that "we
want to help" but no absolute permission. Read what she writes carefully to see
if she has actually given any substance or it's only "let's start a discussion".
Discussions have wasted three year of my research and made no progress.
Â
It seems to me that the Australian copyright act is quite clear
about using copyright material for criticism, legal purposes,
extracting data, etc, but I am not an expert in UK law.
Â
Lawyers could have a good argument too about whether copyright acts
say anything about eyeballing whatsoever. Is automatic text speaking
(for blind persons) not permitted, or reading aloud by others? Can
the speech program not index the material so one can find something
one heard earlier?
The great thing about being a l;awyer is that people like me have to pay lots of
money to find out what I can and cannot do. The Universities should do this.
P.
Â
This whole mess depends on totally obsolete copyright legislation.
Â
And on publishers who are unwilling to change their business model. The real
problem for Open Access is the publishers, isn't it.
--
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
[ Part 2: "Attached Text" ]
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
