Comments for Scholarly Communications @ Duke

Comment on Architectural overreaching by Stacey Valentine

Stacey Valentine — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:32:11 +0000

That’s quite an interesting post. I had always maintained public goods were not subject to copyright law. Otherwise, what prevents the general public or tourists from taking pictures of major landmarks, parks, etc? Where does one draw the line?

I feel the copyright laws got it correct when it came to public property (as opposed to copyright laws pertaining to individual authorship or sport’s/sponsorships like football shirts etc.

I also feel it’s far fetched one would willingly enter into such an arrangement due to loyalty or a sense of fairness – particularly when the financial outlay is not modest!

Comment on Debating Internet regulation by Jared

Jared — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:57:03 +0000

there needs to be a lot more self regulation and responsibilty. We cant rely on our governement to do everything. Every website should have a rating like video games and parents should be allowed to set the rating kids can view.

Comment on Through the copyright looking glass by Sarah McCleskey

Sarah McCleskey — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:06:02 +0000

Hi Kevin, is there really any difference between what the copy shop did and what academic libraries do when we put print copies of books we own on reserve, so that students can come in, check them out, copy them, scan them, read them …?? Glad we have our institutional protections in place; Blackwell, Elsevier, Oxford, Sage and John Wiley all participate in the annual academic license from CCC (Oxford joined very recently!!) …. Thanks for the analysis.

Comment on Copyright should be an author’s right (part 2) by Rick Huard

Rick Huard — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:00:33 +0000

While I don’t disagree at all with your analysis of the copyright incentive, I would like to point out another incentive that you’ve overlooked: the tax savings to Fitzgerald’s estate from a lowball appraisal. The IRS, as Quirk’s article notes, was at that time entirely dependent on information reported by the taxpayer. So although the income generated by the novels during Fitzgerald’s lifetime was modest in the greater scheme of things, “worthless” was probably a conscious stretching of the truth–after all, someone saw enough worth in the copyrights to renew them.

Comment on FAQs by Herry

Herry — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 19:31:49 +0000

can we convert to DVD since we are upgrading out equipment?
- Herioke -

Comment on Copyright should be an author’s right (part 1) by Anne Gilliland

Anne Gilliland — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:52:05 +0000

The author of the original study estimated that an article cost $30.00 on average and then extrapolated the $1.4 million number based on the number of articles exchanged in a 6-month period. So I think he took care of the problem of assuming that sharing one article resulted in the loss of an entire subscription, but several other questions remain. How did he decide that $30.00 was the right average price? Was it valid to extrapolate the year’s loss from the 6 months of figures that were available to him? Did any of the viewers or requesters already have access to the article or articles they viewed? He does point out that one cannot establish the financial impact on publishers based on one article and one site.

For what it’s worth, the author of the original study is a signatory to the Budapest Open Access Initiative. He also makes the point that “many of the most illuminating discussions [about open access to journals] are occurring in journal contributions that are not accessible, except by payment,” and cites articles from Nature and the Lancet as examples.

Comment on What problem can open access solve? by Private Schools Gwinnett

Private Schools Gwinnett — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:08:27 +0000

Okay, I get the feeling there is a pressure brought by the proliferation of online resources that is bearing down on the "access" and cost issues for journal publications. Something has surely has got to give...and will. I know your discussion focuses on a higher-ed level, but trust me that our local eds, such as Gwinnett County private schools will benefit equally.

Comment on That pesky checklist by Private Schools Gwinnett

Private Schools Gwinnett — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:58:37 +0000

Thanks for your article. At the K-12 level, we have perhaps an overly simplified approach. Perhaps it's time for a global, overly-simplified approach to copyright. At some point, and I think we might be there, the legal system will not be able to keep up. I know many Gwinnett County private schools would benefit strictly in the classroom, which brings up another question: Should Fair Use be softer at lower academic levels?

Comment on Falling down before the finish by Private Schools Gwinnett

Private Schools Gwinnett — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:37:50 +0000

Nick,

I couldn’t agree more with your take on this issue. The copyright holder should be happy with the simple fact that a Google is going to bring added visibility to their works. The result will be a win for all.

I am aware of so many Gwinnett County private schoolswhose students and teachers will benefit.

Thanks for your insight.

Comment on Open access for hardware? by Shelley Marcus

Shelley Marcus — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 15:05:42 +0000

My son is a 23 year old law student who lost his left arm in a freak boating accident last December. He has the Dynamic arm and is doing quite well with it. He would like to know if there is anyone out there with a basketball attachment other than the TRL one? He is very athletic and misses playing basketball. The hard socket slips off very quickly as he sweats and it is very frustrating.