Posted on 02/14/2009 6:44:09 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
Yesterday Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) re-introduced the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act. This year it's H.R. 801 (last year it was H.R. 6845), and co-sponsored by Steve Cohen (D-TN), Trent Franks (R-AZ), Darrell Issa (R-CA), and Robert Wexler (D-FL). The language has not changed. The Fair Copyright Act is to fair copyright what the Patriot Act was to patriotism. It would repeal the OA policy at the NIH and prevent similar OA policies at any federal agency. The bill has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee, where Conyers is Chairman, and where he has consolidated his power since last year by abolishing the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property. The Judiciary Committee does not specialize in science, science policy, or science funding, but copyright. The premise of the bill, urged by the publishing lobby, is that the NIH policy somehow violates copyright law. The premise is false and cynical. If the NIH policy violated copyrights, or permitted the violation of copyrights, publishers wouldn't have to back this bill to amend US copyright law. Instead, they'd be in court where they'd already have a remedy. For a detailed analysis of the bill and point by point rebuttal to the publishing lobby's rhetoric, see my article from October 2008. I'll have more soon on ways to mobilize in opposition to the bill and support the NIH and the principle of public access to publicly-funded research. Meantime, if you're a US citizen and your representative is a member of the Judiciary Committee, it's not to early to fire off an email/fax/letter/phone call to your representative opposing the bill and defending the NIH policy. You can find ammo here: Labels: Hot
Democrats supposedly for the people? Nope, beholden to the copyright cartel as usual.
He is a anti-American of the first class and should have been thrown out of the House as he is direct violation of the Constitution which says one must live in the area that they are elected from.
I am sure that FR is on a list of things to get rid of by the Socialist Rats.
If this crap passes, would this stand in the way of a FOIA request regarding research and findings?
In academia, research does not count towards professional reputation unless it is published in a "peer reviewed" journal. The Internet is undermining the business model of the "peer reviewed" journals. They can copyright their edited and formatted copy of the scientist's research report, but the original report is the property of the United States which financed the research.
I believe that the correct term for him would be CARPETBAGGER.
I understand that. I meant it is even more ridiculous that the journals have done nothing to earn the right to claim ownership of the research. They did not even pay the researcher for the right to print it. They have no leg to stand on in their claim other than, “That’s the way it has always been done.”
I’m not sure about the medical journals but some of the others actually have page charges (the author’s employer pays for the article to be published).
I’m not prepared to say the journals do nothing. They do coordinate the peer review, as is pointed out in the Aoki letter.
The way that I understand it is that the medical journals are petitioning the government (Conyers) to make it illegal for the researchers to send their research to anyone else for publishing after they have sent it to be peer reviewed. If the journal coordinated a peer review, that part should not be reprinted but the researcher should be able to do anything they want with their own work.
Rep. Conyers wants science to be secret⦠or you will pay
DiscoverMagazine | 3/6/09
Posted on 03/06/2009 5:47:17 PM PST by LibWhacker
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2201115/posts
· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
· Google ·
· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar · | ||
|
|||
Gods |
Note: this topic is from February. But there's a more recent one, so I'm going to ping this one, with a link to the update already posted above. It's one of those rare four-list ping topics. |
||
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
In other words, this vile Snivil Serpent wants to add yet more “special rights” to a privileged nobility who own intellectual “property”, while denying such rights to the taxpayers who paid the bills to produce it!
Exactly so!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.