Chapter XX: Copying Restrictions

On my opinion copying shouldn´t be allowed without mentioning the source properly. No matter what the thing under copying is. Really, when you think of copying, what actually is the difference between copying a book or a piece of music? Or a painting? Text seems to be so easily copied, music or art enjoy more respect or how to say - copying them usually makes the copier feel at least a bit guilt. Just that an author has most definitely seen a lot of effort in writing the book, and to be able to write a book actually requires some talent too. Of course it is different than more artistic talent needed for making music or to paint. And writing source code, it also requires certain kind of talent.

So, is copying good or bad? As I said above, it is not bad if you respect the actual source. And to be precise, that is only quoting. When thinking of copying a whole product then it gets a bit tricky. Since if thinking of a musician his/hers income comes from the music, is it correct to copy his/hers work without paying? Of course not.

When lining the copying to source code the GNU GPL is just excellent. This kind of voluntary sharing works very nice since everybody knows the situation. And why not in other industries also, it just has to be clearly stated to everybody participating.

Chapter XVIII: Open Access

For example Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering and Technology (IRCSET) has ruled open access to all research papers which are published under its funding. There is also a time frame: all the papers must be available within six months of first publication. The papers should be put in an open access repository. IRCSET includes this open access to its terms and conditions of offering and providing funding. And it is not a little sum which IRCSET funds: in 2008 it will allocate approximetely 26 million euros.

This choice of the IRCSET lines with international practice which aims to enhance access to publicly-funded research.

Also some Irish universities are providing open access repositories of their own. Even a national open access repository system is developing, it will connect the universities´s and other participating institutions´s repositories.

Open Access Repository system does include the usual copyright and fair practice. And publication on it doesn´t stop from publicating also in a research journal or commercial publication.

What does this gain? As it is said in the source: “The intellectual effectiveness and progress of the widespread research community can be continually enhanced where there is recourse to as wide a range of shared knowledge and findings as possible.” So this kind of Open Access repositories enhance intellectual effectiveness, more people can access the materials and perhaps benefit from it in order to make research of their own.

This is an excellent opportunity to reduce Digital Divide. It makes things available, enables access to those who can´t afford to buy. Maybe this even better ensures the advancement of scientific research and innovation, as also said in the source, with this openness duplication of research effort is deducted.

And to this can also be quoted what Steven Levy has written in his book: "If you don´t have access to the information you need to improve things, how can you fix them?".

Source

After writing this I heard from the news that Life-magazine publish photos for free, it was also something to do with Google. But as you can read from the magazine´s pages, it is free to use their photos. This really is such a nice service! Of course you can copy whatever picture you want from the Internet, but still I feel this is nice, copying is done with permission.

Chapter XVII: GNU GPL

"The GNU General Public License is a free, copyleft license for software and other kinds of works."

GNU GPL is there to use, change and share. Only thing "restraining" is that the version you make from it has to be free also and that those who receive your version know that it is under the GPL and they can also do some modifications and so on.

Strengths
Freedom; since everybody can have the product and modify it if they want to. Sharing; since that is a way of getting diversity to products and lots of talent fixed to develop things.

Weaknesses
??

Opportunities
As pointed out in the strengths, this kind of sharing and freedom draws certain people who has abilities and expertise; the product will be diverse and continuously developing.

Threats
In a way, certain directions might try to make it hard to distribute the product. And maybe in the future some copyright laws might create some problems, the freedom could get attacked.


GNU GPL

Chapter XV: Different Schools of IP

There are two schools of intellectual property (IP), the Anglo-American and Continental European. What they have in common is their historical origin, copyright stem from feudal law licensing printers to publish books. Censorship and prior restraints were the crux of it. Nowadays publication is legitimate, but information freedom can be seen relatively new concept. When national law systems and legal codifications emerged it meant the end of medieval feudal law and it also points the moment when different national regimes of IP law became more clear and diverge.

One of the commonalities between the two schools is the idea/expression dichotomy: IP protects expressions of ideas, not ideas as such. Both schools also protect inventions (patent), writings (copyright), trademarks, trade secrets, design and models.

But what is the divergence? The Anglo-American school of IP is utilitarian and economic while Continental European focuses to the author´s moral rights, to integrity of the person. Anglo-American contains only limited rights of authors to the integrity of their person as expressed in the work. So there is a common ground but in the Anglo-American school is the economic right of an author highlighted in the expense of their right of personality.

Actually this purely economic perspective has been condemned (also in the US) since it questions freedom of speech. There have been examples of limiting radical satirical critiques of American society. Also state claims hardly at all power over information and enables the private sector to control it. This is not so evident in Europe, there is less contradiction between public and private. The US regime IP is contradictory because it forbids state action which imposes prior restraint on speech and limits restraints on it after publication but at the same time copyright law operates prior restraint on speech.

What is Intellectual Property?

IP Australia: What is Intellectual Property?

Eric Engle: When is Fair Use Fair?