Science Commons translation project and Fair Use survey


Published on

presented at CC Asia Pacific Meeting 2010, Seoul, Korea

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Science Commons translation project and Fair Use survey

  1. 1. Science Commons translation project; Fair Use online survey Tomoaki Watanabe Creative Commons Japan Creative Commons Asia & Pacific Meeting June.5.2010. Seoul For licensing information, see the last page.
  2. 2. Science Commons Translation project <ul><li>What it is: </li></ul><ul><li>At </li></ul><ul><li>Translates articles and documents from Science Commons. </li></ul><ul><li>Raise awareness and promotes sharing of scientific data and scholarly materials through the site. </li></ul><ul><li>The project is a friendly independent project. </li></ul><ul><li>What it is not: </li></ul><ul><li>Not SC Japan (an official affiliate) – which takes some formal paperwork and review process. </li></ul><ul><li>Not a part of CC Japan. Some CCJP – SCtp members know each other. CCJP’s legal lead is on the board of SCTp </li></ul>
  3. 3. Science Commons Translation project <ul><li>Members – scientists, translators of patent documents, technologists in science-related field. Increasing rapidly (now about a dozen). </li></ul><ul><li>Main activities – translation </li></ul><ul><li>Other activities – networking among scientists and other interested people </li></ul><ul><li>Future prospects – not decided yet </li></ul><ul><li>Origin – Spun out of a symposium during the open access week </li></ul>
  4. 4. Fair Use online survey <ul><li>26Questions, 900+ respondents  40pg report </li></ul><ul><li> Submitted to a government panel </li></ul><ul><li>No, not a representative sampling. (sorry!) </li></ul><ul><li>Driven by a concern – users’ voices are mostly absent from copyright reform discussions. </li></ul><ul><li>Expertise required – legal, research (survey), statistical, & technical (google spreadsheet, excel, etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>No budget. </li></ul>
  5. 5. Resources <ul><li>Developing questions – how best to design questions (legally meaningful, suitable for analysis) </li></ul><ul><li>Publicizing the survey – reach a wide range of people </li></ul><ul><li>Analyzing and writing a report </li></ul><ul><li>CC JP staff 3 consistently, heavily involved, + 5-7 partially involved, </li></ul><ul><li>6 external advisors – legal and statistical </li></ul><ul><li>Partners in publicizing stage – twitter notables, UGM sites, scholars, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Google spreadsheet + Excel + Word </li></ul><ul><li>Time consuming: selecting questions/ wording neutrally / cleaning data / drawing charts </li></ul>
  6. 6. Major findings <ul><li>More liberal copyright regime wanted. </li></ul><ul><li>(71% liberal, 15% strict, 14% don’t know) </li></ul><ul><li>Creators, money-making creators, users all want liberal regime equally, it seemed. </li></ul><ul><li>Accidental inclusion and some other uses deemed fair more widely among money-making creators than non-earning creators. </li></ul><ul><li>Fair use (61%) v. specific exemptions (20%) </li></ul><ul><li>Fair use on moral rights yes(40) v. no(36) v. d/n(24) </li></ul>
  7. 7. Permissive/ Strict prefecence No significant difference among creators, money-making creators, and users.
  8. 8. Fair Use wanted by many
  9. 9. Should fair use apply to moral rights?
  10. 10. (very subjective) Evaluation <ul><li>Good experience </li></ul><ul><li>Time consuming, needs expertise </li></ul><ul><li>Called for data-driven policy-making </li></ul><ul><li>Delivered Internet users’ voices to the policy-making table </li></ul><ul><li>Effects limited </li></ul><ul><li>People more pro-fair use than we expected, but not in all aspects. </li></ul>
  11. 11. License Information <ul><li>Licenses : </li></ul><ul><li>- Creative Commons Attribution License 2.5 Generic </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>- Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike License 3.0 US </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>(You can choose either one (or both) of the above two.) </li></ul><ul><li>For your information: there is no copyright notice, notice referring to license or disclaimer of warranties. There is no URI specified by the licensor to be associated with this work. </li></ul><ul><li>An example of how to carry credits and other information: </li></ul><ul><li>“ Science Commons translation project; Fair Use online survey” by Tomoaki Watanabe. License: CC-BY 2.5 Generic ( ). </li></ul><ul><li>An example of credits and other information, in case of a derivative work: </li></ul><ul><li>Part of this work is derived from a presentation material “Science Commons translation project; Fair Use online survey” by Tomoaki Watanabe. </li></ul>
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.