The Difference between Copyright Infringement and Plagiarism—and Why It Matters; Library Journal, 8/17/16

Rick Anderson, Library Journal; The Difference between Copyright Infringement and Plagiarism—and Why It Matters:

"TELLING THE DIFFERENCE

If you were to take Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, change the title and the characters’ names, and pass it off as your original work, that would be plagiarism. However, there would be no copyright infringement, because Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland is in the public domain and therefore no longer subject to copyright.

On the other hand, if you were to take 50 Shades of Grey—a work currently in copyright—change the title and the characters’ names, and pass it off as your original work, that would constitute both plagiarism and copyright infringement. Stealing the author’s work in this way and selling an unauthorized derivative of it would not only be unethical; it would also be illegal.

Under U.S. law, it might be an example of stealing that rises to the level of a felony punishable by imprisonment, depending on its demonstrable financial impact on the legitimate rights holder."

Britain’s Paper Tigers; New York Times, 8/10/16

Stig Abell, New York Times; Britain’s Paper Tigers:

"The Sun can still call an election correctly, can still elicit outrage and comment. The Mirror, The Sun and The Mail hope to turn their vast online audiences into a profitable business model.

And there is a gradual resurgence of a willingness to pay for quality. The Times and The Sunday Times, paywalled and protected, have become profitable perhaps for the first time in history. Paywalls — once seen as an embodiment of Luddism in the giddy world of the free internet — now seem essential to the survival of professional writing.

Yet there has never been a more hostile environment to journalism than exists today, and not only in economic terms. The democratizing effect of social media, a potentially healthful development, has also given rise to a cynicism directed toward the mainstream media. This is all part of a new angriness in politics."

Sydney Morning Herald Faces Uncertain Print Future in Australia; New York Times, 8/17/16

Keith Bradsher and Michelle Innis, New York Times; Sydney Morning Herald Faces Uncertain Print Future in Australia:

"Kate McClymont, 58, has been breaking news at The Sydney Morning Herald for decades. One of the newspaper’s marquee journalists, Ms. McClymont appears in the paper’s ads.

“We have been holding the powerful in this city to account for a long time,” Ms. McClymont said.

Most recently, she pursued a state government minister, Eddie Obeid, uncovering how his private businesses were improperly benefiting from his public role. Mr. Obeid was found guilty in June of misusing his public office. He will soon face a second court case over mining leases he obtained from the state government.

“We have shone a light where crooks would prefer places remained dark,” Ms. McClymont said. “I hate the idea of people getting away with anything.”

“It is bad for democracy,” she added, “if this voice is diminished in any way.”"

Stand Up for Open Access. Stand Up for Diego.; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), 8/9/16

Ana Acosta and Elliot Harmon, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); Stand Up for Open Access. Stand Up for Diego. :

"The movement for open access is not new, but it seems to be accelerating. Even since we started following Diego’s case in 2014, many parts of the scientific community have begun to fully embrace open access publishing. Dozens of universities have adopted open access policies requiring that university research be made open, either through publishing in open access journals or by archiving papers in institutional repositories. This year’s groundbreaking discovery on gravitational waves—certainly one of the most important scientific discoveries of the decade—was published in an open access journal under a Creative Commons license. Here in the U.S., it’s becoming more and more clear that an open access mandate for federally funded research will be written into law; it’s just a matter of when. The tide is changing, and open access will win.

But for researchers like Diego who face prison time right now, the movement is not accelerating quickly enough. Open access could have saved Diego from the risk of spending years in prison.

Many people reading this remember the tragic story of Aaron Swartz. When Aaron died, he was facing severe penalties for accessing millions of articles via MIT’s computer network without "authorization." Diego’s case differs from Aaron’s in a lot of ways, but in one important way, they’re exactly the same: if all academic research were published openly, neither of them would have been in trouble for anything.

When laws punish intellectual curiosity and scientific research, everyone suffers; not just researchers, but also the people and species who would benefit from their research. Copyright law is supposed to foster innovation, not squash it."

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."

Olympic lawyers go for gold in trademark protection; CNBC, 8/18/16

Nicholas Wells, CNBC; Olympic lawyers go for gold in trademark protection:

"The Olympic games may be coming to a close in Brazil, but Olympic lawyers are still working hard in the U.S.

The U.S. Olympic Committee has come under fire this year for sending warning letters to businesses tweeting with "official" Olympic hashtags like "#TeamUSA" and "#Rio2016." But this isn't the first time the USOC has taken steps to protect its trademarked assets. Legal actions involving the USOC have become as routine as the games themselves.

Part of it is due to the special permission afforded the USOC in defending its intellectual property, and some is an abundance of intellectual property to be defended."

EpiPen’s 500 Percent Price Hike Leaves Patients Scrambling; Huffington Post, 8/18/16

Anna Almendrala, Huffington Post; EpiPen’s 500 Percent Price Hike Leaves Patients Scrambling:

"The EpiPen, an easy-to-use injectable shot filled with medicine that can stop a life-threatening allergic reaction, has increased in price from about $100 for a pack of two pens in 2009 to over $600 this year.

Pharmaceutical company Mylan purchased the rights to the pen back in 2007, and it appears that they’ve taken a page from “pharma bro” Martin Shkreli and re-priced their newly acquired product. That is, they’ve spiked prices for no apparent research and development reason related to the product, except perhaps to make up for the tens of millions of dollars they’ve spent on TV commercials to promote it, reports CBS news.

The price spike also coincides with the recall of one of EpiPen’s competitors, the Auvi-Q from the pharmaceutical company Sanofi US. The company recalled their pen in October because of inaccurate dosage issues...

Pharmaceutical watchdogs and politicians have weighed in on the price hike, pushing back on Mylan’s pricing scheme and calling for competitors to enter the market."