Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Copyright Advocacy Group Violates Copyright

Posted by kdawson on from the how-to-thoroughly-discredit-yourself dept.

word munger writes "Commercial scholarly publishers are beginning to get afraid of the open access movement. They've hired a high-priced consultant to help them sway public opinion in favor of copyright restrictions on taxpayer-funded research. Funny thing is, their own website contains several copyright violations. It seems they pulled their images directly from the Getty Images website — watermarks and all — without paying for their use."

3 of 176 comments (clear)

  1. didn't we already pay? by Spacepup · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:
    "They want to restrict access to publicly-funded research results by requiring that everyone pay a fee to see it."

    If the research is funded by the public, didn't we already pay to see it?

    1. Re:didn't we already pay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, too bad for you and your company. Don't expect to take public money and turn it into to your own corporate profits.

      End of story. Spare me the "but some was private and some was...", blah, blah, blah, crap. Your company held out its greedy little hands to take OUR tax dollars. Any knowledge gained from public money must be given back to the public. Period. No jumping through hoops or other fancy legal crap to keep from returning the publics ROI. We want our dollars back with interest or with gained public knowledge.

  2. Re:web designer by fm6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Organizations are collectively responsible for their joint actions, even if every single member didn't sign off on the specific action. Suppose Prism persuades the administration of a University that they have to stop their faculty from "stealing IP." If the university seriously want to change its people's behavior, it implements new policies and make it very clear to the faculty that they have to follow them.

    In general, that's how organizations respond when they decide they shouldn't be doing something: they tell their people not to do it, and sanction them if they don't listen.

    So Prism is going around telling other organizations to implement a policy while failing to implement it themselves. Sounds like hypocrisy to me.