Spend 8 minutes with Tim Berners-Lee and listen to him explain the enormous potential of the semantic web built upon open access and open data. He also explains why standards and openness are cornerstones in this development.
(via UBC Academic Search)
Yesterday, the Cecilia Renfors presented the results of her investigation on copyright issues in relation to the Internet (press release in Swedish). The investigation entitled Music and Film on the Internet – threat or possibility? (Musik och film på Internet – hot eller möjlighet?). The purpose of this investigation was to understand and to create a way in which illegal file-sharing would decrease and users would be encouraged to pay for the downloading of video and audio.
The main suggestion in this investigation is to hold the ISP’s liable for users’ treatment of copyrighted material. In reality this would entail that the ISP would move from being an anonymous carrier of information to being actively involved in the content their customers desire. Cecilia Renfors suggests that the ISP’s should be forced to, for example, close accounts for users involved in illegal file sharing.
These suggestions have not been accepted quietly. Naturally the ISP’s are protesting – they don’t want to chase their own customers. But there is a wider issue at stake here.
Suppose that an Internet account is terminated because it has been used for illegal file sharing. This punishment does not fit the crime. Considering the drive towards e-government and the amount of services which are moving wholly online the loss of one’s Internet connection is too high a punishment. Another question is who actually carried out the downloading? Was it the underage child? Or is it a neighbor abusing an open network?
Most users do not know enough about their technology to control their own Internet accounts. In addition they do not know enough about the complexities of copyright law in relation to the Internet. A study (pdf here – in Swedish) user’s rights (paid for by an ISP), also presented yesterday, shows that most people do not know which actions in relation to the copying of copyrighted material are legal or not. This latter study shows that 83% of Swedish teenagers download music from the Internet. Half of them believe that when they make a copy of music for a friend or family member that this act is also illegal.
An example of scenarios presented in the examination:
My friend has bought a song on the internet. She plays it for me on her mp3 player and I would like to copy the song to my mp3 player. Is this act legal?
Teenagers answer
* No: 51%
* Yes: 29 %
* Don’t know: 21%Teenagers parents answer:
* No: 55%
* Yes: 21 %
* Don’t know: 24%
The correct answer is that this act is legal. Sharing a legally purchased song with friends and family is permissible. It is not permissible to share it to the general public nor is it legal to circumvent technical protection measures to copy the song.
The lack of legal and technical information makes this a sensitive issue. Naturally everyone within a society is expected to know the laws which applies to them. Ignorance of the law can never be a defence. However, the fact is that few people really know whats what in copyright and online environments.
If we create an environment where we begin closing access to Internet we are taking a step back in the information society. Access to Internet today is arguably more important than being connected to a telephone system. Not that I would like to give up either.
A good short term strategy when attempting to prevent something is to use obviously false arguments. This is a good strategy because even false arguments can be believed if they are stated with a sense of conviction. But this is a crappy strategy in the long run since it undermines the credibility of the fool making the false argument.
One of the arguments against open access is that open access will ruin the peer review system. This is obviously total bull but stated with conviction by publishers it sounds almost credible. It sounds very credible to those who have no idea what peer-review is. It sounds even more dangerous when the importance of peer-review to the progress of science is explained.
So people tend to get nervous when open access is invoked and fear for the demise of good science. Therefore it is always a good thing to have a answer to this prepared.
Peter Suber’s article in the September 2007 SPARC Open Access Newsletter is just what you need – please read Why Open Access Undermine Peer Review?
The AAP/PSP has launched PRISM (Partnership for Research Integrity in Science & Medicine – read the press release) which seems to be nothing more than a lobby organization against Open Access. Among the more strange arguments (actually commonly used by opponents to OA) is that OA will ruin the peer-review system. The press release states:
Critics argue that peer reviewed articles resulting from government funded research should be available at no cost. However, the expenses of peer review, promotion, distribution and archiving of articles are paid for by private sector publishers, and not with tax dollars.
The idea of peer-review is that the articles should be reviewed by other researchers in the same field since they are the most competent and familiar. Like most other academics the task of peer-review is a challenge, an opportunity, a drain on precious time and a learning opportunity. Therefore, it is a task done, for the most part, with great seriousness (but maybe not enthusiasm) – and most importantly it is done for FREE. In other words the academic carries out this work while being paid from someone other than the publisher. Open Access will not harm the peer-review system since the system does not rely on the publishers.
For a much better and deeper rebuttal of the arguments in the press release read Peter Suber’s response to their arguments.
Update/Additional info:
According to Boing Boing at its launch the Prism website included copyrighted images used without the owners permission.
The current edition of CTWatch Quarterly (August 2007) is themed The Coming Revolution in Scholarly Communications & Cyberinfrastructure.
My only problem is when does a revolution stop being coming, approaching and imminent and actually appear to be here. The Open Access movement should not be discribed as a coming event. It is here and it is spreading. But never mind my splitting of terminological hairs just read the journal. Its table of contents includes an interesting array of articles and authors. It’s available both in html and in pdf.
The Shape of the Scientific Article in The Developing Cyberinfrastructure Clifford Lynch, Coalition for Networked Information (CNI)
Next-Generation Implications of Open Access Paul Ginsparg, Cornell University
Web 2.0 in Science Timo Hannay, Nature Publishing
Reinventing Scholarly Communication for the Electronic Age J. Lynn Fink, University of California, San Diego
Philip E. Bourne, University of California, San Diego
Interoperability for the Discovery, Use, and Re-Use of Units of Scholarly Communication Herbert Van de Sompel, Los Alamos National Laboratory Carl Lagoze, Cornell University
Incentivizing the Open Access Research Web Tim Brody, University of Southampton, UK Les Carr, University of Southampton, UK Yves Gingras, Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) Chawki Hajjem, Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) Stevan Harnad, University of Southampton, UK; Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) Alma Swan, University of Southampton, UK; Key Perspectives
The Law as Cyberinfrastructure Brian Fitzgerald, Queensland University of Technology, Australia Kylie Pappalardo, Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Cyberinfrastructure For Knowledge Sharing John Wilbanks, Scientific Commons
Trends Favoring Open Access Peter Suber, Earlham College
On the 15th August Norway opened a National Center for Free Software whose purpose it is to work with actors from industry, university, research and development environments and the public sector. The center’s goal is to increase competence in, and the use of Free Software in both private and public sectors in addition to stimulating competition in the programming sector.
They even have a magazine called FriProg… The Norwegians seem to be taking Free Software much more seriously than the swedes are.
I can still feel the warm summer breeze while walking in the shade of the trees. Then I open them again and remember that I have marking to do before term begins in a couple of days…
Wish I was still here…
For the first time in I don’t know how long I have been away. Not only have I been away from my office and telephone but I have also been offline and out of touch. In addition to this I have also been mentally off work – it has been a very relaxing experience. My only connection to work has been my seaside literature which has been (as always) work related, focusing mainly on copyright, open access and the public domain. It has all been very relaxing and I am now ready to come back with a better tan and full of energy.
 
I spent some of my downtime over here…
Boing Boing reports about a cool Open Library project:
The Internet Archive has launched a demo of the Open Library, a project that seeks to gather all the information about all the world’s books and make it publicly available as a giant books wiki.
While many books are making their way online for free access, most still are restricted or cost money to touch. The Open Library combines links to open resources with information on in-copyright works and enables you and me to review, annotate, correct and convene.
I think this project (which right now seems to point to almost half a million books) is very cool — it’s going to be a major addition to the world’s open cultural infrastructure. I have a hunch that it’s going to be the primary way many if not most people access books, and I see it becoming an always-open window on the desk of every librarian.
Aaron Swartz led this project, which was conceived by Brewster Kahle — please send them support, critiques and book databases!
Lets hope the project grows!
The general image of the librarian is definitely uncool but this image has been changing for a long time. When the New York Times published its article A Hipper Crowd of Shushers last week (8 July) this was a sign of the times.
Librarians? Arenâ??t they supposed to be bespectacled women with a love of classic books and a perpetual annoyance with talkative patrons â?? the ultimate humorless shushers?
Not any more. With so much of the job involving technology and with a focus now on finding and sharing information beyond just what is available in books, a new type of librarian is emerging…
How did such a nerdy profession become cool â?? aside from the fact that a certain amount of nerdiness is now cool? Many young librarians and library professors said that the work is no longer just about books but also about organizing and connecting people with information, including music and movies.
The upcoming documentary The Hollywood Librarian (release 29 September) will also become part of the way in which the perception of librarians is changing.
Instead of being only the strict formal organizer the librarian is actually on the forefront of several important debates in the information society. The questions of access to knowledge, privacy, free speech, open access and parts of the DRM debate are being lively discussed among librarians.