开放存取运动中的数字权利管理.docx
《开放存取运动中的数字权利管理.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《开放存取运动中的数字权利管理.docx(13页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
![开放存取运动中的数字权利管理.docx](https://file1.bdocx.com/fileroot1/2023-5/24/b33ea974-ad5a-43e1-8783-9893a9addd98/b33ea974-ad5a-43e1-8783-9893a9addd981.gif)
开放存取运动中的数字权利管理
开放存取运动中的数字权利管理
来源:
openAccess
Abstract:
GrowingconvictionthatscientificprogresswillsignificantlybenefitifscholarlyarticlesandresearchpapersaremadefreelyavailableontheWebhasgivenrisetotheOpenAccess(OA)movement.WhilethereissomeawarenessthatOAarticlesmayrequiredigitalrightsmanagement(DRM),thereiscurrentlyonlylow-levelinterestinthetopic,withmanyOAadvocatesmaintainingthatithasnorelevancetoOA.TheissueiscomplicatedbythefactthattherearecurrentlytwowaysinwhichresearchpapersaremadeOA,eachofwhichhasdifferentimplicationsfromarightspointofview.
Keywords:
policyanalysis–copyrightlaw,CreativeCommons,DRMSdesign,OpenAccess,scholarlypublishing,stakeholders
Introduction
OAhasgainedalotoftractionoverthelastyear,butithasalsoattractedconsiderableresistancefromcommercialandsocietypublishers.SincetheycurrentlygeneratesubstantialincomesfromsellingsubscriptionstotheirjournalsscholarlypublishersfearthatifresearchismadefreelyavailableontheInternettheserevenueswillbesignificantlythreatened.
GiventheconsequentstrugglesimplytomakeOpenAccesshappenmanyOAadvocatesarguethatworryingaboutDRMtodaycouldproveadistractionfromthemoreimportanttaskof"freeingtherefereedliterature."
SincemanyalsoviewDRMassynonymouswiththeuseof"technicalmeasures"designedtorestrictaccess,ratherthanasabroadsetoftoolsformanagingrightsinadigitalenvironment,thereisatendencytoseeDRMasanissueforproprietaryinterestsalone.Thedangeris,however,thatiftheOAmovementfailstoengagewiththetopicthoseproprietaryinterestsmaysettheDRMagenda,tothepossibledetrimentofOA.
Nevertheless,somepreliminaryworkonDRMisbeingdonebytheOAmovement,andthegrowingsuccessoftheCreativeCommons(cf.sources)mayencourageOAadvocatestotakeagreaterinterestinthetopic.
WhatisDRM?
AnydiscussionofDRMinthecontextofOAhasfirsttoseektodefinetheterm.ThecontinuingcontroversysurroundingP2Pandillegalfileswapping,forinstance,hasledmanytoconcludethatDRMamountstolittlemorethan"lockingup"contentwithelectronicpadlocks.Indeed,sincethisperceivedemphasisonrestrictingaccessisviewedastheveryantithesisofOA,DRMhasbecomethebétenoirofmanyOAadvocates.
WhatthisoverlynarrowviewofDRMoverlooks,however,isthatdigitalrightsmanagementimpliessomethingbroaderthanaccesscontrolalone.Itcanalsobeused,forinstance,toensurecorrectauthorattribution,tocertifydocumentintegrityandprovenance,topreventplagiarism,andindeedtoenablecreatorsasserttheirrightsinwaysthatencourage–ratherthanrestrict–access.
ItmaybehelpfulinthisregardtoviewDRMasatwo-layeredcake.Inthismodelthefirstlayerconsistsofmetadatathatdefinetheusagerules(rights)associatedwiththecontent.Thenontopofthiscanbeplacedan(optional)secondlayerofsoftware-imposedlimitationsoncopying,printing,viewingetc.(i.e.technicalmeasures)inordertoenforcetheusagerules.
SomeOAadvocatesarguethatneitherlayerisrelevantinanOAenvironment.Afterall,theysay,theaimofOAistomakeresearchpapersavailabletoeveryone,withoutrestriction.Itmaybethattheuseoftechnicalmeasures–evenforapparentlyharmlesspurposessuchasensuringdocumentintegrity–willprove"politically"unpalatablefortheOAmovement(althoughFrederickFriend'sINDICAREarticle(Friend2004)appearstodemuronthis).Thereare,however,strongreasonsforarguingthattheuseofrightsmetadatadoeshaveanimportantroletoplay,andwillforthisreasonbethemainfocusofthisarticle.
Whatauthorsrequire
Itisclear,forinstance,thatinmakingtheirresearchfreelyavailableontheWebresearchershavenointentionofgivingawaytheirIPR.Theironlyaimistoallowotherstoreadandbuildontheirworkwithoutfacingtheobstacleofthetoll-barriersrepresentedbyincreasinglyexpensivejournalsubscriptions.
InfactweknowresearcherswanttomaintaincontrolovertheirworkontheWebbecausetheyhavetoldusso.In2002,forinstance,whentheJISC-fundedRightsMetadataforOpenarchiving(RoMEO)Project(cf.sources)askedresearchersfortheirviews55percentofthosesurveyed(bothOAandnon-OAauthors)saidtheywantedtolimitusageoftheirworkstocertainpurposes–e.g.educationalornon-commercial.
Andwhileover60%werehappyforthirdpartiestodisplay,print,save,excerptfromandgiveawaytheirpapers,theywantedthistobeonconditionthattheywereattributedastheauthorsandthatallcopiesdistributedweredonesoverbatim.
WhatRoMEOmadeclear,saysSteveProbets,alecturerininformationscienceatUK-basedLoughboroughUniversitywhowasinvolvedintheRoMEOProject,isthat"authorsareinterestedinmaintainingsomeformofcontroloverwhocandowhatwiththeirarticles."
AsBrianSimboli,asciencelibrarianatLehighUniversityinBethlehem,PAputsit:
"Theshiftfromtoll-accesstoopenaccessmay(illogically)encouragepeopletoassumethatthewholeconcept'intellectualproperty'hasorshouldundergosomesortofseachange.Intellectualpropertyisstillintellectualproperty,regardlessofhowitisaccessed"(Simboli2005).
Somerightsreserved
WhattheRoMEOsurveyalsorevealed,however,isthatthe"allrightsreserved"modelofclassicalcopyrightismorethanmostresearcherswant."[T]heprotectionoffered[to]researchpapersbycopyrightlaw,"thereportconcluded"iswayinexcessofthatrequiredbymostacademics."
Inotherwords,whenreleasingtheirworkontotheopenseasoftheWebOAauthorsareinterestedinassertingonlysomeoftherightsoftraditionalcopyright(e.g.therighttobenamedasauthor),whilewaivingotherrights(e.g.therighttocopyormakederivativeworks).Thatis,theirwishistomaketheirpapersavailableona"somerightsreserved"basis.
Butifresearchersdon’tmakecleartotheirreadersonwhatbasisapaperhasbeenreleased,howwilltheirreadersknow?
Theymaymistakenlyassume,forinstance,thatapaperhasbeenmadeavailablewithoutanyrestrictiononitsuseandreuse,asifithadsimplybeenplacedinthepublicdomain.Alternatively,theymayfeelconstrainedaboutusingapaperinthemoreliberalwaytheauthorintends,forfearoflegalreprisal.
Consequently,iftheydismissDRMOAauthorsriskdeprivingthemselvesofausefulmechanismforspecifyingonwhatbasistheyaremakingtheirwork"freely"available.
Expressionofrights
Forthisreason,in2002ProjectRoMEObegandevelopinganXML-basedsystemdesignedtoexpressrightsandpermissionsinanOAenvironment.TheseissuesarenotuniquetoOAauthorshowever.Motivatedbythesamedesiretoprovidegreaterlicensingflexibilityforweb-basedcontent,forinstance,in2002anumberofintellectualpropertylawyers,includingLawrenceLessig(cf.sources)andJamesBoyle(cf.sources),foundedCreativeCommons(CC).
ByseparatingoutthebasketofrightsprovidedbyclassicalcopyrightCreativeCommonsaimstogivecreatorsgreaterflexibilitytomixandmatchthoserightstheywishtoassert,andthosetheywanttowaive.
TheapplicabilityofCreativeCommonstoOAwasimmediatelyapparenttotheProjectRoMEOteam,whoincorporatedCClicencesintotheworktheyweredoing.ExplainsProbets:
"[T]hefeelingsoftheRoMEOProjectwerethattheCreativeCommonslicenceswouldbesufficienttospecifythemajorityofrestrictions/conditionsrequiredbyauthors(e.g.thatauthorsareattributed,orthatderivativeworksorcommercialusesareallowed)."
Probets,however,questionswhetherinsertingrightsmetadataintoOApaperscanbeclassifiedasDRM."I'mnotsurethatIwouldregardtheselicencesasaDRMsolution",hesays."[They]indicatethewaystheworkcanbeused;theydonottechnicallyenforcethattheseconditions/restrictionsareapplied."
This,however,issurelytoonarrowaviewofDRM.Howbettertodescribetheprocessofinsertingmachine-readablerightsinformationintodigitalcontentinordertocontrolhowitisusedthan"digitalrightsmanagement"?
Othersarguethatutilisingrightsmetadatawithoutanymeansofenforcingtheirprohibitionsispointless.Bythesamereasoning,however,wemightconcludethatitisawasteoftimecreatinganyrule,orlaw,unlessitcanbephysicallyenforcedatthepointofpotentialinfringement.Wealsoknowthatanyonehappytoinfringecopyrightlawcancircumventmostifnotalltheelectronicpadlocksdevisedtodate.
TworoadstoOA:
Thecaseofthe"GoldRoad"
Forresearcherswantingtobettermanagetherightsintheirpapers,however,thereisamoreimmediateproblemthanenforcement–namelyhowtheyestablishanddefinetheirrightsinthefirstplace.AndsincetherearetwowaysinwhichresearcherscanmaketheirpapersOAaone-size-fits-allapproachisnotcurrentlypossible.
Forresearchersusingthe"GoldRoad"toOAmattersarerelativelystraightforward:
theycansimplypublishinoneofthenew-stylescholarlyjournalsproducedbyOApublisherslikeBioMedCentral(BMC)(cf.sources)andthePublicLibraryofScience(PLoS)(cf.sources).Byreversingthetraditionalsubscriptionmodelandchargingauthors(ormorelikelytheirfunders)afeetopublish,ratherthanchargingreaderstoread,goldenpublishersareabletomakeresearchpapersfreelyavailableontheWebwithoutanyaccesscosts.
Moreimportantly,bytreatingpublishingasaserviceprovidedtotheauthor,ratherthanasapropertytransactioninwhichthepublisheracquirescopyrightinreturnforpublishingapaper,bothBMCandthePLoSarehappytous