As the Law Is Blind to Research’s Intellectual Property Distinctions
This is the third in a series of blogs based on excerpts from an early and ongoing draft of a book (here for comment) in which I develop a case for amending copyright in the United States so that it is once again serving research and scholarship.
The book’s working title is Copyright’s Constitutional Violation: When the Law Fails to “Promote the Progress of Science” (While Promoting Practically Everything Else). What follows is a key piece of the argument for reform. For now that there is an agreement that open access serves science best (as per my last blog on the open access consensus), this can only be achieved, and publishers fairly compensated, by having the law recognize research articles as a distinct form of intellectual property. That distinct form, once accepted in the law, could then be subject to both open access requirements and publisher compensation from its principal users.
Read the full article in Slaw, Canada’s online legal magazine.