Copyright Scenarios
Current copyright law states that anything that
is produced in final form is automatically copyrighted.
If I am doing research that is not yet completed,
can it be protected?
This might seem like a strange issue, but if
a scholar is doing research on an issue that is of a sensitive
nature to a large corporation, should that scholar’s
research be protected? If she is researching the effects of
a certain chemical on the environment, it might be in the
interest of the company who made the chemical to acquire all
research on the product whether the research is completed
or not. Not only would it save the company money, being research
that the company didn’t have to pay for, it might also
save them some bad publicity.
However, should a scholar be forced to jeopardize
her publishing potential, and therefore her career, because
of a powerful corporation’s interests and desires?
The Skinny
In most instances scholars are more than happy
to share their research and writings with anyone who inquires.
Indeed, the academy encourages the sharing of knowledge. That
is why we are all here right? However, in certain situations
scholars can reserve their finished work or even works in
progress. If results of the research are not conclusive (for
instance, if they have not been replicated), then colleagues
will typically not request to look at the new research.
Or, if the researcher owns the copyright or patent
on the materials, she might decide to keep control of her
work even after it has been published. This, however, is the
antithesis of the academic mission at most institutions. The
judicial system has to balance the academic benefits to the
scholar who controls his own research against societal interests.
An example is Dow Chemical Co. v. Allen (1982).
In this case, Dow Chemical wanted all of the research that
was still being completed on the effects on livestock and
other animals of certain toxins from a herbicide the company
had created. Scientists from the University of Wisconsin were
studying these effects, and the company wanted every bit of
research they had accumulated, finished or not. The court
sided with the scientists, in part because if the public read
the new research, it would eliminate the market for future
scientific papers on the subject.
Research is seen as being critical to faculty
members' careers and livelihood. In effect, the courts felt
that scholars must be able to carry out work-related research
without obtrusion from the government and other entities.
Back to the Scenarios
page |
