<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Exchange Server">
<!-- converted from text --><style><!-- .EmailQuote { margin-left: 1pt; padding-left: 4pt; border-left: #800000 2px solid; } --></style>
</head>
<body>
<div>The Canadian Association of University Teachers' policy statement on academic freedom section 5 addresses academic governance, that is, academic staff should have a major role in governance in all matters pertaining to academic work, i.e. curriculum, tenure
and promotion: https://www.caut.ca/about-us/caut-policy/lists/caut-policy-statements/policy-statement-on-academic-freedom
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In other words, in Canada decisions about the copyright of the work of academics (teaching materials as well as publication) is considered part of academic freedom. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>best,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Heather Morrison </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-------- Original message --------</div>
<div>From: SANFORD G THATCHER <sgt3@psu.edu> </div>
<div>Date: 2018-03-24 5:07 PM (GMT-05:00) </div>
<div>To: David Wojick <dwojick@craigellachie.us> </div>
<div>Cc: goal@eprints.org, scholcomm <scholcomm@lists.ala.org>, Danny Kingsley <dak45@cam.ac.uk>
</div>
<div>Subject: Re: [GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] On Academic Freedom </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;">
<div class="PlainText">Universities in the US under copyright law could, if they so chose, to specify<br>
that all faculty writings done in the course of their employment that relate to<br>
their academic careers are to be regarded as "work made for hire." Under that<br>
regime academic authors would have no rights at all with respect to their<br>
publications. So, yes, copyright could, in theory, be used to take away all<br>
choice. That might not be a matter of content, but I see no reason to restrict<br>
the meaning of "academic freedom" to just the idea that appears in the AAUP's<br>
statement. That's an arbitrary definition.<br>
<br>
Sandy Thatcher<br>
<br>
On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 04:02 PM David Wojick <dwojick@craigellachie.us> wrote:<br>
><br>
>I cannot speak for Danny but this seems to confuse intellectual freedom, <br>
>which the term "academic freedom" usually means, with freedom from <br>
>regulation. Academics are governed by a great many rules, each of which may <br>
>restrict their freedom in some way. None of this necessarily has anything <br>
>to do with academic freedom.<br>
><br>
>So I would say that things like contract requirements have nothing to do <br>
>with academic freedom, unless they specify what cannot be said. Copyright <br>
>does not do this.<br>
><br>
>David<br>
><br>
>David Wojick<br>
><a href="http://insidepublicaccess.com/">http://insidepublicaccess.com/</a><br>
><br>
>At 03:26 PM 3/24/2018, SANFORD G THATCHER wrote:<br>
>>So, Danny, let me ask if you are ok with funders requiring authors to publish<br>
>>under a CC BY license and waive all rights they otherwise would have to have<br>
>>input into how and where their writings get translated and how and where their<br>
>>works are republished (e.g., in edited form that distorts the author's meaning<br>
>>and associates the author with a cause, ideology, etc. that the author finds<br>
>>abhorrent)?<br>
>><br>
>>Is these rights do not pertain to academic freedom, please explain why.<br>
>><br>
>>The same might be asked of those universities that require immediate OA <br>
>>posting<br>
>>of dissertations, allowing no time for an author to revise it and find a<br>
>>publisher for it. Various associations (in history, medieval studies, etc.)<br>
>>have adopted recommended embargo periods to deal with this problem. You are<br>
>>saying that those associations are wrong to be concerned about this problem?<br>
>>That this has nothing to do with academic freedom either?<br>
>><br>
>>Sandy thatcher<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 04:07 AM Danny Kingsley <dak45@cam.ac.uk> wrote:<br>
>> ><br>
>> >Hi all,<br>
>> ><br>
>> >Can we have a quick chat about Academic Freedom? I am frankly fed up <br>
>> with this<br>
>>being trotted out in multiple discussions in relation to open access. It is<br>
>>akin to the PhD student who recently tearfully told me that the<br>
University’s<br>
>>requirement for her to provide a digital version of her thesis in addition to<br>
>>the hardbound one was a ‘breach of her human rights’. I feel the<br>
academic<br>
>>freedom argument is moving into similar levels of hysteria.<br>
>> >I wrote a blog recently that addresses this issue: Scare campaigns, we have<br>
>>seen a few<<a href="https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p05">https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p05</a>><br>
>><a href="https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p05">https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p05</a> (relevant bits below)<br>
>> >Usually I hear ‘Academic Freedom’ thrown in in relation to<br>
being able to<br>
>>choose where to publish. On the SCHOLCOMM and GOAL lists in the discussion<br>
>>about Willinsky’s copyright proposal, academic freedom has been thrown<br>
into<br>
>>the mix again. Given, there is potentially some validity in the statement <br>
>>that:<br>
>>“Policies that impact academics that are not developed and supported by<br>
>>academics are not consistent with academic freedom.” But copyright<br>
ownership<br>
>>(other than the moral right to be identified as an author of a work), and the<br>
>>place of publication are NOT enshrined in academic freedom.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >Academic Freedom is not being threatened by copyright licensing <br>
>> requirements.<br>
>>This is a stupid side issue. We are fiddling while Rome burns. The real threat<br>
>>to academic freedom is the systematic undermining of expertise and <br>
>>academia. As<br>
>>the UK justice secretary recently said - “People in this country have<br>
had<br>
>>enough of experts”<br>
>><a href="https://www.ft.com/content/3be49734-29cb-11e6-83e4-abc22d5d108c">https://www.ft.com/content/3be49734-29cb-11e6-83e4-abc22d5d108c</a> Let’s<br>
not<br>
>>even begin to talk about what is happening in the land of stripes and stars.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >Let’s keep focus on the issues that matter.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >Danny<br>
>> ><br>
>> >*****************************************<br>
>> >The new scare threats to ‘Academic Freedom’<br>
>> ><br>
>> >The term ‘Academic Freedom’ comes up a fair bit in discussions<br>
about <br>
>> open<br>
>>access. In his tweet sent during the Researcher to Reader conference*, one of<br>
>>my Advisory Board colleagues Rick Anderson tweeted this<br>
>>comment<<a href="https://twitter.com/Looptopper/status/968463945190313984">https://twitter.com/Looptopper/status/968463945190313984</a>>:<br>
>> ><br>
>> >“Most startling thing said to me in conversation at the #R2RConf:<br>
>> >“I wonder how much longer academic freedom will be tolerated in<br>
IHEs.”<br>
>>(Specific context: authors being allowed to choose where they publish.)<br>
>> ><br>
>> >In this blog I’d like to pick up on the ‘Academic<br>
Freedom’ part of the<br>
>>comment (which is not Rick’s, he was quoting).<br>
>> ><br>
>> >Academic Freedom, according to a summary in the Times Higher<br>
>>Education<<a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2010/12/21/defining-academic-freedom">https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2010/12/21/defining-academic-freedom</a>>
<br>
>>is primarily that “Academic freedom means that both faculty members and <br>
>>students can engage in intellectual debate without fear of censorship or <br>
>>retaliation”.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >This definition was based on the American Association of University <br>
>> Professors’ (AAUP) Statement on Academic <br>
>> Freedom<<a href="https://www.aaup.org/report/1940-statement-principles-academic-freedom-and-tenure">https://www.aaup.org/report/1940-statement-principles-academic-freedom-and-tenure</a>>
<br>
>> which includes, quite specifically, “full freedom in research and in <br>
>> the publication of results”.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >Personally I read that as meaning academics should be allowed to <br>
>> publish, not that they have full freedom in choosing where.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >Rick has since contacted the <br>
>> AAUP<<a href="https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/03/05/open-letter-aaup-faculty-authors-full-freedom-publication/">https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/03/05/open-letter-aaup-faculty-authors-full-freedom-publication/</a>>
<br>
>> to ask for clarification on this topic. Last Friday, he tweeted that the <br>
>> AAUP has declined to revisit the 1940 statement to clarify the ‘freedom <br>
>> in publication’ statement in light of evolution of scholarly <br>
>> communication since 1940.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >The reason why the Academic Freedom/ ‘restricting choice of <br>
>> publication’ threat(s) is so concerning to the research community has <br>
>> changed over time. In the past it was essential to be able to publish in <br>
>> specific outlets because colleagues would only read certain publications. <br>
>> Those publications were effectively the academic ‘voice’. However <br>
>> today, with online publication and search engines this argument no longer <br>
>> holds.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >What does matter however is the publication in certain journals is <br>
>> necessary because of the way people are valued and rewarded. The problem <br>
>> is not open access, the problem is the reward system to which we are <br>
>> beholden. And the commercial publishing industry is fully aware of this.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >So let’s be clear. Academic Freedom is about freedom of expression <br>
>> rather than freedom of publication outlet and ties into Robert Merton’s <br>
>> 1942 norms of science <br>
>> <<a href="http://www.collier.sts.vt.edu/5424/pdfs/merton_1973.pdf">http://www.collier.sts.vt.edu/5424/pdfs/merton_1973.pdf</a>> which are:<br>
>> >§ “communalism”: all scientists should have common ownership of <br>
>> scientific goods (intellectual property), to promote collective <br>
>> collaboration; secrecy is the opposite of this norm.<br>
>> >§ universalism: scientific validity is independent of the <br>
>> sociopolitical status/personal attributes of its participants<br>
>> >§ disinterestedness: scientific institutions act for the benefit of a <br>
>> common scientific enterprise, rather than for the personal gain of <br>
>> individuals within them<br>
>> >§ organized scepticism: scientific claims should be exposed to <br>
>> critical scrutiny before being accepted: both in methodology and <br>
>> institutional codes of conduct.<br>
>> ><br>
>> >If a publisher is preventing a researcher from publishing in a journal <br>
>> based on their funding or institutional policy rather than the content of <br>
>> the work being submitted then this is entirely in contravention of all of <br>
>> Robert Merton’s norms of science. But the publisher is not, as it <br>
>> happens, threatening the Academic Freedom of that author.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> >Dr Danny Kingsley<br>
>> >Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services<br>
>> >Head, Office of Scholarly Communication<br>
>> >Cambridge University Library<br>
>> >West Road, CB3 9DR<br>
>> >e: dak45@cam.ac.uk<<a href="mailto:dak45@cam.ac.uk">mailto:dak45@cam.ac.uk</a>><br>
>> >p: 01223 747 437<br>
>> >m: 07711 500 564<br>
>> >t: @dannykay68<br>
>> >w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk<<a href="http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/">http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/</a>><br>
>> >b: <a href="https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk">https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk</a><br>
>> >o: orcid.org/0000-0002-3636-5939<br>
>> ><br>
>> >[/Users/dak45/Library/Containers/com.microsoft.Outlook/Data/Library/Cache <br>
>> s/Signatures/signature_404167699]<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>Sanford G. Thatcher<br>
>>Frisco, TX 75034<br>
>><a href="https://scholarsphere.psu.edu">https://scholarsphere.psu.edu</a><br>
>><br>
>>"If a book is worth reading, it is worth buying."-John Ruskin (1865)<br>
>><br>
>>"The reason why so few good books are written is that so few people<br>
>>who can write know anything."-Walter Bagehot (1853)<br>
>><br>
>>"Logic, n. The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance<br>
>>with the limitations and incapacities of the human<br>
>>misunderstanding."-Ambrose Bierce (1906)<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
Sanford G. Thatcher<br>
Frisco, TX 75034<br>
<a href="https://scholarsphere.psu.edu">https://scholarsphere.psu.edu</a><br>
<br>
"If a book is worth reading, it is worth buying."-John Ruskin (1865)<br>
<br>
"The reason why so few good books are written is that so few people <br>
who can write know anything."-Walter Bagehot (1853)<br>
<br>
"Logic, n. The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance <br>
with the limitations and incapacities of the human <br>
misunderstanding."-Ambrose Bierce (1906)<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
GOAL mailing list<br>
GOAL@eprints.org<br>
<a href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</a><br>
</div>
</span></font>
</body>
</html>