[GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] On Academic Freedom

[Peter Murray-Rust]

On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 7:26 PM, SANFORD G THATCHER <sgt3 at psu.edu> wrote:

> So, Danny, let me ask if you are ok with funders requiring authors to
> publish
> under a CC BY license and waive all rights they otherwise would have to
> have
> input into how and where their writings get translated and how and where
> their
> works are republished (e.g., in edited form that distorts the author's
> meaning
> and associates the author with a cause, ideology, etc. that the author
> finds
> abhorrent)?
>
> Is these rights do not pertain to academic freedom, please explain why.
>
> The same might be asked of those universities that require immediate OA
> posting
> of dissertations, allowing no time for an author to revise it and find a
> publisher for it. Various associations (in history, medieval studies, etc.)
> have adopted recommended embargo periods to deal with this problem. You are
> saying that those associations are wrong to be concerned about this
> problem?
> That this has nothing to do with academic freedom either?
>
> Sandy thatcher
>

This is the clear distinction between rights under copyright and author's
moral rights. Moral rights are not affected by copyright or licences. From
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights :

>>

*Moral rights* are rights <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights> of
creators of copyrighted <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright> works
generally recognized in civil law
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_(legal_system)> jurisdictions and,
to a lesser extent, in some common law
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law> jurisdictions. They include the
right of attribution <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_(copyright)>,
the right to have a work published anonymously
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymity> or pseudonymously
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudonym>, and the right to the integrity
of the work.[1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights#cite_note-1>
The preserving of the integrity of the work allows the author to object to
alteration, distortion, or mutilation of the work that is "prejudicial to
the author's honor or reputation".[2]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights#cite_note-2> Anything else that
may detract from the artist's relationship with the work even after it
leaves the artist's possession or ownership may bring these moral rights
into play. Moral rights are distinct from any economic rights tied to
copyrights. Even if an artist has assigned his or her copyright rights to a
work to a third party, he or she still maintains the moral rights to the
work.[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights#cite_note-3>
PMR> The author can defend their moral rights just as well with CC BY as
with "all rights reserved".

It is a pity that some parties, including for-profit publishers, argue that
CC NC-ND protects the author against misuse of their work. In STEM subjects
it often hands a monopoly interest to the *publisher* , not the author. The
use of default NC/ND licences by some publishers, also when coupled to
lower fees to attract authors to hand over monopoly rights, is seriously
regrettable and seriously holds back the re-use of knowledge in STEM
subjects.

In STEM, if the researcher doesn't accept the CC BY of funders such as
Wellcome Trust (who have an excellent resource on CC BY:
https://wellcome.ac.uk/funding/managing-grant/creative-commons-attribution-licence-cc)
they don't have to take the funding. I assume the same holds in non-STEM
subjects. If an academic wishes to write a book without funding, their
issue is with their employer.


P.


-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader Emeritus in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dept. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20180324/3dd79bae/attachment-0001.html