Drei Thesen zum Wissenschaftsurheberrecht
abernard102@gmail.com 2013-04-24
Summary:
[Form Google's English] "As a scientist, I'm at a university in research and teaching with the copyright in touch - and in both cases, problems are associated with it. But today I would like to deal only with the research side. Let me briefly describe my personal situation. As a junior professorship my contract expires and if I want to stay in science, which is by far the most important to publish in peer-reviewed journals that are well positioned in magazine rankings. If an item after several years of work and a review process in which professional colleagues suggest anonymous contribution and any revisions have inspected free of charge, is finally accepted by such a journal for publication, it is the last step that I fill out a copyright form and all rights to must give the publisher. Of course, without compensation. Lately, however, these forms have changed. You must tick here if you got money for the research of certain facilities in the U.S. or UK that commit to open access publishing. In such a case, the publishers make the item that is freely accessible online. Unfortunately, I could never previously as a tick box. After discussions with many colleagues of different disciplines and interdisciplinary own research on the subject ( PDF ), I dare say: My case is not unique but typical of the vast majority of social and natural sciences. Especially in the humanities, there are fields with dominant book culture, where the situation looks somewhat different. What general conclusions can we draw for the Science copyright? A) In the market for scientific publishing, we are dealing with market failure ... B) As a publicly funded researchers I would be forced to open access ... C) An inalienable right is essential Second Release ..."