An unsigned editorial in the October 25 Manila Times endorses the Public Library of Science. Excerpt: "The greatest benefit will be reaped by poor countries that are effectively cut off from the mainstream of scientific research. Knowledge is a magical commodity. The more it is used, the more it increases and becomes more valuable. The Public Library of Science has opened a way for researchers in all countries to tap into the latest developments in scientific research."
Misinformation alert. The editorial also says, "The Public Library of Science, however, may force us to rethink the concept of intellectual property. Open access makes present copyright laws unenforceable. They perhaps should be rewritten for the widest possible social benefit." Yes, copyright laws should be rewritten to serve the public interest. But no, they do not need to be rewritten in order to make open access possible, and PLoS does not make exising copyright laws unenforceable. PLoS uses copyright law by asking the copyright holder to consent to open access or, more specifically, to the Creative Commons Attribution License.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 10/24/2003 02:48:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
