Apparently Georgia State University has been providing teaching materials to its students without getting the necessary copyright clearance. See the publishers' press release for one side of this story.
I really shouldn't raise my head in public about this lawsuit, because I try to keep quiet about non-OA issues in case I confuse the issues. However, what stands out to me in the above document is something commonly seen in the Open Access debate: publishers glorifying their role. Here's a quote:
“University presses are integral to the academic environment, providing scholarly publications that fit the needs of students and professors and serving as a launch pad from which academic ideas influence debate in the public sphere,” said Niko Pfund, Vice-President of Oxford University Press. “Without copyright protections, it would be impossible for us to meet these needs and provide this service.”
The inference to be drawn from the above paragraph is the obviously false "without copyright protections there would be no scholarship". I suggest the following translation into more grounded reality (copy editing services provided free on this occasion):
“University-based publishing companies are part of the academic food-chain, selling scholar's publications to needy students and professors and serving as one of the channels from which academics' ideas influence debate in the public sphere,” said Niko Pfund, Vice-President of Oxford University Press. “Without copyright protections, it would be impossible for us to meet our needs and provide this business.”
well said. Surely University presses were setup to be facilitators not barriers to knowledge.
ReplyDelete