This week’s articles about copyright concerning higher education, historical scholarship, and what should and should not be free didn’t do too much to cause my views to stray. Generally I believe that the more that is available to the general public, the better. I would go so far as to say that it would be great if scholarship was open and free for anyone with an interest to find and look into, but I understand that this is very unlikely to happen. However, I believe that if this material is not to be free it also should not be ungodly expensive, and the average person should have no trouble accessing this material. Luckily if an individual goes to college or has access to a local library, this access tends to not be a problem as many library organizations tend to invest in database packages for their patrons. However, this still results in large gaps of what can be access for anyone who does not go to a high priced learning institution.
Though I do not know terribly too much about the amount of money that could be made in the world of scholarly writing, from what I can gather not too much is made by the scholar itself. And if there is money to be made it is often by those who are publishing or hosting the material. Furthermore, scholars who are given funding by the government that at one point started with tax payer money should most certainly have the synthesis of their research be available to the public that led to their funding. I would also argue that like musicians, scholars make much of their money through what they do rather than the recorded synthesis of their work. Just as a band makes most of their money from concerts, scholars who are often professors, or other professions, make most of their money from their actual job.
Granted many of these organizations like JSTOR are not for profit, they still make quite large amount of money and charge steep prices for full access to their databases. It is for this reason that I believe that there really is no harm done by the actions of individuals such as Aaron Swartz. I believe that this is one of the situations where the crime committed is either victim-less or near to it. The acts of individuals such as Swartz will not cause realistic damage in the long run to an organization such as JSTOR that works internationally with thousands of organizations.
Also as this is a commentary on copyright I think I’ll try my hand at fair use, in this instance provided by Arsis
Lincoln Loves Cats 