Academic Book About Emojis Can’t Include The Emojis It Talks About Because Of Copyright; Techdirt, August 4, 2023

Mike Masnick, Techdirt ; Academic Book About Emojis Can’t Include The Emojis It Talks About Because Of Copyright

"Sounds interesting enough, but as Goldman highlights with an image from the book, Kiaer was apparently unable to actually show examples of many of the emoji she was discussing due to copyright fears. While companies like Twitter and Google have offered up their own emoji sets under open licenses, not all of them have, and some of the specifics about the variations in how different companies represent different emoji apparently were key to the book...

Now, my first reaction to this is that using the emoji and stickers and whatnot in the book seems like a very clear fair use situation. But… that requires a publisher willing to take up the fight (and an insurance company behind the publisher willing to finance that fight). And, that often doesn’t happen. Publishers are notoriously averse to supporting fair use, because they don’t want to get sued.

But, really, this just ends up highlighting (once again) the absolute ridiculousness of copyright in the modern world. No one in their right mind would think that a book about emoji is somehow harming the market for whatever emoji or stickers the professor wished to include. Yet, due to the nature of copyright, here we are. With an academic book about emoji that can’t even include the emoji being spoken about."

‘Transformative’ journals get booted for switching to open access too slowly; Science, June 20, 2023

JEFFREY BRAINARD, Science; ‘Transformative’ journals get booted for switching to open access too slowly

"Two-thirds of the more than 2300 scientific journals participating in a program designed to flip them to open access (OA) failed to meet prescribed targets for progress in 2022. As a result, the Coalition S group of research funders behind the initiative announced today that it will remove these journals from the program at the end of the year. The funders will no longer pay the fees these journals charge authors for OA publication, although scholars may still publish OA articles in these titles if they pay using other funding sources."

Colorado Open Scholars Summit to examine ‘Open Access in Tenure and Promotion’ March 1; Colorado State University, February 9, 2019

CSU External Relations Staff, Colorado State University; Colorado Open Scholars Summit to examine ‘Open Access in Tenure and Promotion’ March 1

"The second biennial Colorado Open Scholars Summit, a statewide event co-sponsored by nine Colorado universities, will be held on March 1 in the Morgan Library Event Hall at CSU.

The focus of this year’s event, being held from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., is “Open Access in Tenure and Promotion.” The summit will consist of two virtual panels featuring renowned scholars from the U.S. and Canada, followed by local discussions at the nine participating Colorado institutions, including CSU.

The first panel features CSU’s own Patrick Burns, dean of libraries and vice president of information technology, and will be a general discussion of challenges within the tenure and promotion process. This panel will focus on evaluation of scholarly and creative output, with particular attention paid to disincentives built into the T&P process and challenges in evaluating multidisciplinary and non-traditional scholarship.

The second panel will explore the topics of equity, prestige and quality of scholarship, with particular focus on the effect of open access on these areas of T&P evaluation."

Paul Zukofsky, Prodigy Who Became, Uneasily, a Virtuoso Violinist, Dies at 73; New York Times, June 20, 2017

Margalit Fox, New York Times; Paul Zukofsky, Prodigy Who Became, Uneasily, a Virtuoso Violinist, Dies at 73

"He was also known to literary scholars as an ardent defender — too ardent, some said — of the intellectual property of his father, the American poet Louis Zukofsky...

Such behavior also colored Mr. Zukofsky’s guardianship of his father’s copyright. He denied some scholars the right to quote from Louis Zukofsky’s writings altogether. He granted others permission in exchange for payment — an unorthodox demand.

“I don’t think Paul knew anything at all about the academic world,” Mr. Quartermain said. “He was convinced that we were all busy making money on his father’s writings.”

In 2009, in an act that engendered astonishment and rage among scholars, Mr. Zukofsky escalated prevailing tensions by posting a manifesto on Z-site, the official online companion to Louis Zukofsky’s work. His manifesto — since removed — included these provisions:

• “You may not use LZ’s words as you see fit, as if you owned them, while you hide behind the rubric of ‘fair use.’ ”

• “For your own well-being, I urge you to not work on Louis Zukofsky, and prefer that you do not. Working on LZ will be far more trouble than it is worth.”

• “One line you may not cross i.e. never never ever tell me that your work is to be valued by me because it promotes my father. Doing that will earn my lifelong permanent enmity.”

Mr. Zukofsky made securing permission to quote his father so difficult, Mr. Quartermain said, that “I know of people who simply gave up” on Louis Zukofsky scholarship, “and one or two people who gave up on their academic careers, because they could not get anywhere: They’d done their Ph.D.’s and they wanted to publish, but they’d somehow offended Paul.”"

Supporting Open Access; Library Journal, February 20, 2017

John Parsons, Library Journal; 

Supporting Open Access

"AN OPEN CONVERSATION

Both Taylor and Schiff agreed that scholars and researchers need to be a significant part of the Open Access discussion. “Librarians like myself are very much Open Access advocates,” Taylor observed, “but it’s important for us to keep an open mind. We need to listen to what our researchers, scholars, students, and administrators want.” She cautioned against giving only the positive benefits of Open Access for institutions, without understanding the concerns and reservations of those doing the research.

“It’s important to get correct information out there,” Schiff added, “but it’s important to get scholars to jump into the conversation. For example, it would be great if scholars were more involved in discussing the economic challenges in the scholarly communication world. Librarians are naturally involved because our budgets are a huge part of that mix. But we’re paying for the work of scholars. They not only need to be more informed about how their work is part of this economic ecosystem, they also need to advocate for how they think that ecosystem should be sustained—and how resources should be allocated.”"

Library offers workshop ‘Copyright and Fair Use for Graduate Students’; University of Delaware, 9/28/16

UDaily Staff, University of Delaware; Library offers workshop ‘Copyright and Fair Use for Graduate Students’ :

"The University of Delaware Library is offering a Nov. 17 workshop on “Copyright and Fair Use for Graduate Students,” which will deal with the practical application of copyright law and its fair use provisions.

Considering copyright at the beginning of the research process will simplify the completion of the degree requirements for graduate students. Attendees will learn why and when copyright is important to scholars – researchers, writers and teachers – and these important skills:

• How to determine when permission is needed to use an excerpt or image;

• How to obtain permission; what to do when permission to use an image or excerpt cannot be obtained; and

• How to evaluate if fair use may be an appropriate defense for your use of material protected by copyright...

The workshop is available at no charge is open to University of Delaware faculty, staff and students."

Feds Target 'Predatory' Publishers; Inside Higher Ed, 8/29/16

Carl Straumsheim, Inside Higher Ed; Feds Target 'Predatory' Publishers:

"The Federal Trade Commission on Friday filed a complaint against the academic journal publisher OMICS Group and two of its subsidiaries, saying the publisher deceives scholars and misrepresents the editorial rigor of its journals.

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, marks the first time the FTC has gone after what are often known as “predatory” publishers. Such publishers exploit open-access publishing as a way to charge steep fees to researchers who believe their work will be printed in legitimate journals, when in fact the journals may publish anyone who pays and lack even a basic peer-review process."

The Acceleration of Open Access; Inside Higher Ed, 8/18/16

Barbara Fister, Inside Higher Ed; The Acceleration of Open Access:

"So much going on. So much positive change in the air.

One fascinating aspect of this is trying to figure out how exactly the culture is changing. Librarians found out with their institutional repositories that building it alone doesn’t make them come. Hard work doesn’t necessarily bring on a cultural shift, either; institutional affiliation has less gravitational pull than disciplines and societies. Even within disciplines, it’s hard for projects like bioRxiv and MLA Commons to attract scholars and scientists who feel the systems they are familiar with are good enough, or that making their work open is too risky or too much work. But with so many projects taking off, and with such robust platforms rolling out to challenge whatever the big corporations will have to offer, I’m feeling pretty optimistic about our capacity to align the public value of scholarship with our daily practices – and optimistic about the willingness of rising scholars to change the system."

Scholars Unveil New Edition of Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’; New York Times, 12/1/15

Alison Smale, New York Times; Scholars Unveil New Edition of Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ :

"Not since 1945, when the Allies banned the dubious work and awarded the rights to the state of Bavaria, has Hitler’s manifesto, “Mein Kampf,” been officially published in German. Bavaria had refused to release it. But under German law, its copyright expires Dec. 31, the 70th year after the author’s death.

That allows a team of historians from a noted center for the study of Nazism, the Institute for Contemporary History in Munich, to publish its two-volume, 2,000-page edition, a three-year labor complete with about 3,500 academic annotations.

The intention is to set the work in historical context, to show how Hitler wove truth with half-truth and outright lie, and thus to defang any propagandistic effect while revealing Nazism."

Google's Book Search: A Disaster for Scholars; Chronicle of Higher Education, 8/31/09

Geoffrey Nunberg via Chronicle of Higher Education; Google's Book Search: A Disaster for Scholars:

"I'm actually more optimistic than some of my colleagues who have criticized the settlement. Not that I'm counting on selfless public-spiritedness to motivate Google to invest the time and resources in getting this right. But I have the sense that a lot of the initial problems are due to Google's slightly clueless fumbling as it tried master a domain that turned out to be a lot more complex than the company first realized. It's clear that Google designed the system without giving much thought to the need for reliable metadata. In fact, Google's great achievement as a Web search engine was to demonstrate how easy it could be to locate useful information without attending to metadata or resorting to Yahoo-like schemes of classification. But books aren't simply vehicles for communicating information, and managing a vast library collection requires different skills, approaches, and data than those that enabled Google to dominate Web searching.

That makes for a steep learning curve, all the more so because of Google's haste to complete the project so that potential competitors would be confronted with a fait accompli. But whether or not the needs of scholars are a priority, the company doesn't want Google's book search to become a running scholarly joke. And it may be responsive to pressure from its university library partners—who weren't particularly attentive to questions of quality when they signed on with Google—particularly if they are urged (or if necessary, prodded) to make noise about shoddy metadata by the scholars whose interests they represent. If recent history teaches us anything, it's that Google is a very quick study."

http://chronicle.com/article/Googles-Book-Search-A/48245/