3 ms·
Because there is no reason they should be, so the decision can be handled at the legal level and not be as subject to the influence of the journals. They would
by JudgeWapner 7y ago
Because there is no reason they should be, so the decision can be handled at the legal level and not be as subject to the influence of the journals. They would have one chance to fight it before it was cemented into law.
- refurb 7y agoWhy should an author not have rights to their own work, just because it’s scientific in nature? You’re also opening the door to unintended consequences - are scientific textbooks not copyrightable also? If not, why not?
- trolololooo 7y agoYou're making a big assumption that the author of a scientific paper gets to have any rights whatsoever. But that aside - these journals keep valuable research locked up from plenty of long-dead researchers. Their estates aren't getting the money when a grad student is grifted for $90 to view the paper.
- ethbro 7y agoI'd argue we'd be much better off if textbooks weren't eligible for copyright.
- golemiprague 7y agoBecause the researcher is an employee of the university, I don't get a right to my work when working for someone, I get salary instead.