Publishers Face No-Win Situation In University Spat
from the take-a-chill-pill dept
Ever since the Napster brouhaha of yore, and perhaps before that, a consistent theme has cropped up in cases where content publishers take aim at those who distribute said content without paying for it: although their claims often have merit, their litigious actions potentially harm their cause more than help it. This could happen to the Association of American Publishers, which is making bellicose moves against University of California schools making reserve course material available online. The publishers say this violates fair use because — even though college libraries have long copied and distributed such materials — electronic downloads make wide distribution too easy. The publishers could be right, and not enough case law exists to interpret the fuzziness that typically surrounds fair use. However, a lawsuit could result in a Pyrrhic victory, as the case would no doubt bring publishers much negative PR. Moreover, what’s to stop academics from choosing different content? Talk about limited distribution.
Comments on “Publishers Face No-Win Situation In University Spat”
IRB
It will be interesting to see the collision between the pressure to disseminate information freely, vs. the pressure to protect research data from medical experiments. There are many shades of grey in that area.
Re: IRB
For example, even in anonymous form, we would not want the whole university to know about rates of bladder infections among female undergraduates at the women’s clinic. There are scientific journals that talk about stuff like this, but enjoys security-by-obscurity for now.
Re: Re: IRB
I do not understand why anyone would have a problem with others knowing about the rates of infection in a population. It might even do some good by letting people know what they need to watch out for, how well a particular health care system is helping its patients, etc.