DOCSLIB.ORG

The Copyleft Movement: Creative Commons Licensing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Copyleft Movement: Creative Commons Licensing Centre for the Study of Communication and Culture Volume 26 (2007) No. 3 IN THIS ISSUE The Copyleft Movement: Creative Commons Licensing Sharee L. Broussard, MS APR Spring Hill College AQUARTERLY REVIEW OF COMMUNICATION RESEARCH ISSN: 0144-4646 Communication Research Trends Table of Contents Volume 26 (2007) Number 3 http://cscc.scu.edu The Copyleft Movement:Creative Commons Licensing Published four times a year by the Centre for the Study of Communication and Culture (CSCC), sponsored by the 1. Introduction . 3 California Province of the Society of Jesus. 2. Copyright . 3 Copyright 2007. ISSN 0144-4646 3. Protection Activity . 6 4. DRM . 7 Editor: William E. Biernatzki, S.J. 5. Copyleft . 7 Managing Editor: Paul A. Soukup, S.J. 6. Creative Commons . 8 Editorial assistant: Yocupitzia Oseguera 7. Internet Practices Encouraging Creative Commons . 11 Subscription: 8. Pros and Cons . 12 Annual subscription (Vol. 26) US$50 9. Discussion and Conclusion . 13 Payment by check, MasterCard, Visa or US$ preferred. Editor’s Afterword . 14 For payments by MasterCard or Visa, send full account number, expiration date, name on account, and signature. References . 15 Checks and/or International Money Orders (drawn on Book Reviews . 17 USA banks; for non-USA banks, add $10 for handling) should be made payable to Communication Research Journal Report . 37 Trends and sent to the managing editor Paul A. Soukup, S.J. Communication Department In Memoriam Santa Clara University Michael Traber . 41 500 El Camino Real James Halloran . 43 Santa Clara, CA 95053 USA Transfer by wire: Contact the managing editor. Add $10 for handling. Address all correspondence to the managing editor at the address shown above. Tel: +1-408-554-5498 Fax: +1-408-554-4913 email: [email protected] The Centre for the Study of Communication and Culture (CSCC) is an international service of the Society of Jesus established in 1977 and currently managed by the California Province of the Society of Jesus, P.O. Box 519, Los Gatos, CA 95031-0519. 2— VOLUME 26 (2007) NO. 3 COMMUNICATION RESEARCH TRENDS The Copyleft Movement: Creative Commons Licensing Sharee L. Broussard, MS APR [email protected] 1. Introduction The 2006 Pew Internet and American Life Project disregard for rules. Lawlessness in the e-frontier can study notes that “Internet penetration has now reached take many forms, from blatant to subtle, and the legal 73% for all American adults” (Madden, p. 1). This marks system simply cannot keep up. After all, legislation and an astounding growth. In the summer of 1995, Pew adjudication typically occur after the fact. researchers found less than 15% of U.S. adults were Among many other forms, one form of rampant online (p. 3). Because of its explosive growth and the lawlessness on the Internet consists of copyright types of activity that can occur online, many have likened infringement, that is, the unauthorized copying and the Internet to the 19th century U.S. Wild West: it forms distribution of material created and owned by others. an e-frontier of endless possibility, where communities Given the scope of the problem, a number of move- form, cultures grow, and lawlessness flourishes. ments to mitigate copyright infringement on the Not unlike the Wild West, groups with similar Internet have begun. One such movement involves belief systems and interests find one another through the use of digital tools and legal action to prohibit the amazingly interconnected web of newsgroups, net- copyright infringement. Another movement, copyleft, works, sites, blogs, wikis, and other individual and/or seeks to build a richer public domain and change the group digital communication vehicles. They band assignment of rights from the automatic “all rights together, share information, learn from one another, reserved” to a more egalitarian version dubbed “some protect one another at times, and exhibit other signs of rights reserved.” At the forefront of this second move- community—even though their relationships may only ment is Creative Commons, a web-based intellectual exist in the digital world. Not unlike the Wild West, property sharing schema developed by a consortium members of these communities are enculturated to fol- headed by Professor Lawrence Lessig of Stanford low group norms. Members develop their own ways of Law School. doing things: language, style, substance, and so on. This review begins with an examination of the Each person’s values, beliefs, and opinions are shaped ways that existing copyright laws and practices com- by others in the group. Additionally, as in the blogos- pare with the Creative Commons Legal Code. It then phere [the collection of weblogs and online commen- explains how this idea of copyleft works, how it began, tary], influence is hierarchical and shaped by others’ and why its proponents encourage its widespread use to willingness to forward and build upon information of satisfy the disconnect existing between current intel- common interest. Not unlike the Wild West, existing lectual property laws and common Internet practices. rules do not always fit activities occurring on the The essay concludes with a discussion of the pros and Internet, which in turn generates lawlessness and/or cons of the system. 2. Copyright Copyright law protects the expression of ideas, of Literary and Artistic Works established the interna- not the ideas themselves. Solutions or ideas find their tional importance of recognizing and protecting intel- protection under applicable patent law. First estab- lectual property ownership and rights. Today, the lished in 1886, the Berne Convention for the Protection World Intellectual Property Organization, headquar- COMMUNICATION RESEARCH TRENDS VOLUME 26 (2007) NO. 3 — 3 tered in Geneva, Switzerland administers. the Berne 3. The right to distribute the work publicly. Convention treaty and five other international intellec- 4. The right to publicly perform a work. tual property treaties. 5. The right to publicly display a work. The World Intellectual Property Organization was 6. The right to transmit a sound recording, such as a formed in 1967 to “promote the protection of intellec- CD, through digital audio means. (pp. 429-431) tual property throughout the world through cooperation The Berne Convention also introduced the con- among states and in collaboration with other interna- cept of Fair Use, also known as Free Use or Fair tional organizations,” (WIPO, about). WIPO member- Dealing. As defined by Title 17 of the U.S. Code, “the ship includes 184 nations. fair use of a copyright work, including such use by Article 2 of the Berne Convention protects liter- reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other ary and artistic works defining them as “every produc- means specified by that section, for purposes such as tion in the literary, scientific, and artistic domain, what- criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (includ- ever may be the mode or form of its expression,” ing multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or (WIPO, Understanding, p. 8). Additionally, the Berne research is not an infringement of copyright” Convention, Article 6b, requires that member countries (Association, 2007, ¶ 16). grant to authors the right to claim authorship of the U.S. and international law allow Fair Use of work (right of paternity) and the right to object to any copyrighted information according to “1) the purpose distortion or modification of the work (right of integri- and character of use, 2) the nature of the copyrighted ty) (p. 12). work, 3) the amount and substantiality of the portion Generally, since its inception, copyright is a used, and 4) the effect on the plaintiff’s potential mar- property right attempting to balance the rights of the ket” (Trager, Russomanno, & Dente-Ross, 2006, pp. producer with the rights of society to build upon that 441-445). work. According to the WIPO, copyright exists for Though there are consistencies among nations’ two reasons: intellectual property laws, each has separate and dis- One is to give statutory expression to the moral tinct laws and regulations about copyright. The World and economic rights of creators in their cre- Intellectual Property Organization summarizes each of ations and to the rights of the public in access- its member states’ intellectual property laws on its ing those creations. The second is to promote website. These summaries appear in parallel formats; creativity, and the dissemination and applica- the WIPO keeps them current for reference purposes. tion of its results, and to encourage fair trade, The interested reader can access them at http:// which would contribute to economic and social www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/ipworldwide/country.htm. development. (WIPO, Understanding, p. 6) Because the author of this essay resides in the The World International Property Organization U.S., a brief summary of U.S. copyright law follows. explains the rights that an owner of a work can either As part of the U.S. Lanham Act, since 1976 prohibit or authorize: copyright applies to “original works of authorship” that are “fixed in any tangible medium of expression” 1. Its reproduction in various forms, such as printed and belong to the work’s creator by default. U.S. copy- publications or sound recordings; right law was established in 1787 when the original 2. The distribution of copies; States adopted Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. 3. Its public performance; Constitution, stating that Congress has the authority to 4. Its broadcasting or other communication to the “promote the progress of science and the useful arts by public; securing for a limited time to authors and inventors the 5. Its translation into other languages; exclusive right to their writings and discoveries.” The 6. Its adaptation, such as a novel into a screenplay Copyright Act of 1790 laid the foundation for U.S. (Understanding, p. 9-10). intellectual property law. It “granted American authors Similarly, Trager, Russomano and Dente-Ross the right to print, re-print, or publish their work for a (2006) enumerate the six exclusive rights recognized in period of 14 years and renew for another 14” U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Easy As Abc: Categorizing Open Source Licenses
    EASY AS ABC: CATEGORIZING OPEN SOURCE LICENSES Andrew T. Pham1, Matthew B. Weinstein2, Jamie L. Ryerson3 With more than 180,000 open source projects available and its more than 1400 unique licenses, the complexity of deciding how to manage open source usage within “closed-source” commercial enterprises have dramatically increased.4 Because of the complexity and risks associated with open source—where source code is made freely available for all to review, edit, and use—many closed-source commercial enterprises discourage or prohibit use of open source; a common and short-sighted practice. With a proper open source management framework, open source can be an invaluable resource, and its risks can be understood, managed and controlled. This article proposes a simple, consistent and effective open source categorization and management system to enable a peaceful coexistence between open source and closed-source codes. Free and open source software (“FOSS” or collectively “open source”) is a valuable tool, but one that must be understood to be used effectively. The litany of risks associated with use of open source include: having to release a derivative product incorporating open source under the same open source license; incorporating code that infringes a patent; violating an open source license’s attribution requirements; and a lack of warranties and indemnities. Given the extensive investment of time, money and resources that goes into product development, it comes as no This article is an edited version of the original, which dealt not only with categorizing open source licenses but also a wider array of issues associated with implementing an open source policy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Game's the Thing: Properties, Priorities and Perceptions in the Video Games Industries
    The game's the thing: properties, priorities and perceptions in the video games industries Mac Sithigh, D. (2017). The game's the thing: properties, priorities and perceptions in the video games industries. In M. Richardson, & S. Ricketson (Eds.), Research Handbook on Intellectual Property in Media and Entertainment (pp. 344-366). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784710798 Published in: Research Handbook on Intellectual Property in Media and Entertainment Document Version: Peer reviewed version Queen's University Belfast - Research Portal: Link to publication record in Queen's University Belfast Research Portal Publisher rights Copyright 2017, the Author. This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Queen's University Belfast Research Portal is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The Research Portal is Queen's institutional repository that provides access to Queen's research output. Every effort has been made to ensure that content in the Research Portal does not infringe any person's rights, or applicable UK laws. If you discover content in the Research Portal that you believe breaches copyright or violates any law, please contact [email protected]. Download date:25. Sep. 2021 The Game’s the Thing: Property, Priorities and Perceptions in the Video Games Industries Daithí Mac Síthigh* Published in Richardson and Ricketson (eds), Research Handbook on Intellectual Property in Media and Entertainment (Edward Elgar 2017) I.
    [Show full text]
  • Open but Not Free — Publishing in the 21St Century Martin Frank, Ph.D
    PERSPECTIVE For the Sake of Inquiry and Knowledge Research culture is far from knowledge. The new technology Disclosure forms provided by the author are available with the full text of this arti- monolithic. Systems that underpin is the internet. The public good cle at NEJM.org. scholarly communication will mi- they make possible is the world- grate to open access by fits and wide electronic distribution of From MIT Libraries, Massachusetts Insti- starts as discipline-appropriate op- the peer-reviewed journal litera- tute of Technology, Cambridge. tions emerge. Meanwhile, experi- ture and completely free and un- 1. Budapest Open Access Initiative (http:// ments will be run, start-ups will restricted access to it by all scien- www.opensocietyfoundations.org/ flourish or perish, and new com- tists, scholars, teachers, students, openaccess/read). munication tools will emerge, and other curious minds.” 2. Bethesda Statement on Open Access Pub- lishing (http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/ because, as the Bethesda Open There is no doubt that the pub- handle/1/4725199/suber_bethesda Access Statement puts it, “an old lic interests vested in funding .htm?sequence=1). tradition and a new technology agencies, universities, libraries, 3. Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities have converged to make possible and authors, together with the (http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/ an unprecedented public good. power and reach of the Internet, berlin_declaration.pdf). The old tradition is the willingness have created a compelling and nec- 4. Suber P. Open access. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2012. of scientists and scholars to pub- essary momentum for open ac- 5.
    [Show full text]
  • When Is Open Access Not Open Access?
    Editorial When Is Open Access Not Open Access? Catriona J. MacCallum ince 2003, when PLoS Biology Box 1. The Bethesda Statement on Open-Access Publishing was launched, there has been This is taken from http:⁄⁄www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm. a spectacular growth in “open- S 1 access” journals. The Directory of An Open Access Publication is one that meets the following two conditions: Open Access Journals (http:⁄⁄www. 1. The author(s) and copyright holder(s) grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable, doaj.org/), hosted by Lund University worldwide, perpetual right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit Libraries, lists 2,816 open-access and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital journals as this article goes to press medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship2, as (and probably more by the time you well as the right to make small numbers of printed copies for their personal use. read this). Authors also have various 2. A complete version of the work and all supplemental materials, including a copy of “open-access” options within existing the permission as stated above, in a suitable standard electronic format is deposited subscription journals offered by immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository that is supported traditional publishers (e.g., Blackwell, by an academic institution, scholarly society, government agency, or other well- Springer, Oxford University Press, and established organization that seeks to enable open access, unrestricted distribution, many others). In return for a fee to interoperability, and long-term archiving (for the biomedical sciences, PubMed Central the publisher, an author’s individual is such a repository).
    [Show full text]
  • Open Licensing Toolkit for Staff
    Open Licensing Toolkit for Staff The Hewlett Foundation Open Licensing Toolkit for Staff is licensed May 2015 under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Legal Disclaimer: This material is for general informational purposes only and does not represent legal advice as to any particular set of facts; nor does it represent any undertaking to keep recipients advised of any relevant legal developments. Please consult appropriate professional advisors as you deem necessary. The Hewlett Foundation shall not be held responsible for any claims or losses that may arise from any errors or omissions in this document. Hewlett Foundation Open Licensing Toolkit for Staff Table of Contents 1. Hewlett Foundation Commitment to Open Licensing 2. Hewlett Foundation Procedures a. Frequently Asked Questions b. Decision Tree c. Creative Commons License Types d. Guidelines for Marking Openly Licensed Documents 3. Sample Language a. Grantee Communications b. Grant Proposal Template c. Grant Reporting Requirements d. Grant Agreement Letter e. Direct Charitable Activities (DCA) Contract May 2015 Hewlett Foundation Open Licensing Toolkit for Staff Hewlett Foundation Commitment to Open Licensing As part of our commitment to openness and transparency, the Hewlett Foundation has long supported open licensing—an alternative for traditional copyright that allows and encourages sharing of intellectual property. Open licenses, such as those developed by our longtime grantee Creative Commons, protect authors’ rights while giving explicit permission to others to freely use, distribute, and build upon their work. The benefits of open licensing are clear: open licensing increases the chances that good ideas will get a hearing, that others will be able to do something with them, and ultimately that they will have their greatest impact.
    [Show full text]
  • Missions and Film Jamie S
    Missions and Film Jamie S. Scott e are all familiar with the phenomenon of the “Jesus” city children like the film’s abused New York newsboy, Little Wfilm, but various kinds of movies—some adapted from Joe. In Susan Rocks the Boat (1916; dir. Paul Powell) a society girl literature or life, some original in conception—have portrayed a discovers meaning in life after founding the Joan of Arc Mission, variety of Christian missions and missionaries. If “Jesus” films while a disgraced seminarian finds redemption serving in an give us different readings of the kerygmatic paradox of divine urban mission in The Waifs (1916; dir. Scott Sidney). New York’s incarnation, pictures about missions and missionaries explore the East Side mission anchors tales of betrayal and fidelity inTo Him entirely human question: Who is or is not the model Christian? That Hath (1918; dir. Oscar Apfel), and bankrolling a mission Silent movies featured various forms of evangelism, usually rekindles a wealthy couple’s weary marriage in Playthings of Pas- Protestant. The trope of evangelism continued in big-screen and sion (1919; dir. Wallace Worsley). Luckless lovers from different later made-for-television “talkies,” social strata find a fresh start together including musicals. Biographical at the End of the Trail mission in pictures and documentaries have Virtuous Sinners (1919; dir. Emmett depicted evangelists in feature films J. Flynn), and a Salvation Army mis- and television productions, and sion worker in New York’s Bowery recent years have seen the burgeon- district reconciles with the son of the ing of Christian cinema as a distinct wealthy businessman who stole her genre.
    [Show full text]
  • Online Software Copyright Infringement and Criminal Enforcement
    Online Software Copyright Infringement and Criminal Enforcement Submitted: May 14, 2005 Randy K. Baldwin American University Washington College of Law What are Warez and Who Trades Them? This paper will discuss infringement of software copyrights with a focus on criminal ‘warez trading‘ of copyrighted software on the Internet. Warez are infringing electronic, digital copies of copyrighted works whose copy protection measures have been removed.1 Warez are most often ‘cracked’ software programs whose digital rights management (DRM) and copy control measures have been circumvented. Once DRM controls have been disabled, warez are subsequently distributed and traded on the Internet, usually without any direct financial gain to the distributors and traders.2 Distribution of warez usually starts as small-scale deployments from password- protected file transfer protocol (FTP) servers and encrypted and/or password-protected web sites run by warez groups. Warez are then traded on the Internet among broader groups via direct peer-to-peer (P2P) connections, and encrypted emails with warez attachments. Trading and downloading of warez is coordinated via closed, invite-only Internet Relay Chat (IRC) channels, Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) encrypted email, Instant Messaging (IM), private chat rooms, direct connect P2P networks, and messages posted to Usenet groups under pseudonyms.3 Servers and sites hosting warez and communications means used by warez traders are designed to avoid detection and identification by law enforcement.4 File and directory names are intentionally 1 Goldman, Eric, A Road to No Warez: The No Electronic Theft Act and Criminal Copyright Infringement. 82 Or. L. Rev. 369, 370-371 (2003). [hereinafter Road to No Warez], available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=520122 (last visited May 9, 2005) (on file with author) (Defines warez and warez trading.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Software Licensing
    An Introduction to Software Licensing James Willenbring Software Engineering and Research Department Center for Computing Research Sandia National Laboratories David Bernholdt Oak Ridge National Laboratory Please open the Q&A Google Doc so that I can ask you Michael Heroux some questions! Sandia National Laboratories http://bit.ly/IDEAS-licensing ATPESC 2019 Q Center, St. Charles, IL (USA) (And you’re welcome to ask See slide 2 for 8 August 2019 license details me questions too) exascaleproject.org Disclaimers, license, citation, and acknowledgements Disclaimers • This is not legal advice (TINLA). Consult with true experts before making any consequential decisions • Copyright laws differ by country. Some info may be US-centric License and Citation • This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). • Requested citation: James Willenbring, David Bernholdt and Michael Heroux, An Introduction to Software Licensing, tutorial, in Argonne Training Program on Extreme-Scale Computing (ATPESC) 2019. • An earlier presentation is archived at https://ideas-productivity.org/events/hpc-best-practices-webinars/#webinar024 Acknowledgements • This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR), and by the Exascale Computing Project (17-SC-20-SC), a collaborative effort of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science and the National Nuclear Security Administration. • This work was performed in part at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which is managed by UT-Battelle, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725. • This work was performed in part at Sandia National Laboratories.
    [Show full text]
  • Creative Commons Open Licenses - What Is It All About?
    CREATIVE COMMONS OPEN LICENSES - WHAT IS IT ALL ABOUT? Introductory presentation by Paul G. West Creative Commons South African Chapter Lead STATING THE UNNECESSARY This workshop is dedicated to providing a harassment-free experience for everyone regardless of gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, age or religion. We do not tolerate harassment of participants or facilitators in any form. Sexual language and imagery is not appropriate, including in any online platform that may be used. AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO ADD THAT . • Nothing in this workshop should be construed as legal advice! • We will be talking about an interesting range of topics that touch on copyright, fair use and open licensing. • We will together learn more about copyright, open licensing and open practices in various communities. • Upon completion, you should feel a little more comfortable sharing facts about copyright and open licensing and good open practices. • I am NOT a lawyer – I am a supporter of Open Educational Resources (OER) and Creative Commons (CC) open licenses. THE STORY DOES NOT START IN 2002 UNESCO Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000181682 ORIGINS OF OER CREATION OF A MOVEMENT Larry Lessig and others founded the Creative Commons 2001 Charles M. Vest speaks of a meta-university 2007 a transcendent, accessible, empowering, dynamic, communally constructed framework of open materials and platforms
    [Show full text]
  • Who Pays for Music?
    Who Pays For Music? The Honors Program Senior Capstone Project Meg Aman Professor Michael Roberto May 2015 Who Pays For Music Senior Capstone Project for Meg Aman TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... 3 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................ 4 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 4 MUSIC INDUSTRY BACKGROUND ...................................................................................... 6 THE PROBLEM .................................................................................................................. 8 THE MUSIC INDUSTRY ..................................................................................................... 9 THE CHANGING MUSIC MARKET .................................................................................... 10 HOW CAN MUSIC BE FREE? ........................................................................................... 11 MORE OR LESS MUSIC? .................................................................................................. 12 THE IMPORTANCE OF SAMPLING ..................................................................................... 14 THE NETWORK EFFECTS ................................................................................................. 16 WHY STREAMING AND DIGITAL MUSIC STORES ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fair Use FAQ for Students
    Fair Use FAQ for Students What is copyright? How is it different from using proper attribution and avoiding plagiarism? Copyright is actually a limited bundle of rights that the government grants to authors of original works such as novels, plays, essays, and movies. For a limited time (currently the life of the author plus 70 years, in most cases), copyright gives the author control over who can copy, distribute, publicly perform or display, or create derivative works (such as sequels or translations) based on their work. The purpose of copyright is to encourage the creation and dissemination of new works for the benefit of the public. Copyright is therefore much broader than the norms against plagiarism. Plagiarism is the presentation of someone else’s work as one’s own; copyright infringement can take place even where the user is honest about the work’s true author. As long as you use proper attribution, plagiarism should not be a worry for you. Copyright is somewhat more complex: unless your use satisfies one of the exceptions or limitations described in the Copyright Act, you cannot use copyright protected material without permission. Fair use is one of the most important limitations to copyright. What is fair use? Fair use is a part of copyright law that allows certain uses of copyrighted works, such as making and distributing copies of protected material, without permission. It evolved over time as judges made case-by-case exceptions to copyright to accommodate uses that seemed legitimate and justifiable regardless of the copyright holder’s apparent rights. Typical early fair uses involved criticism, commentary, and uses in an educational or scholarly context.
    [Show full text]
  • Publisher Correction: Pairwise Library Screen Systematically Interrogates Staphylococcus Aureus Cas9 Specificity in Human Cells
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-06029-z OPEN Publisher Correction: Pairwise library screen systematically interrogates Staphylococcus aureus Cas9 specificity in human cells Josh Tycko 1,5, Luis A. Barrera1,6, Nicholas C. Huston1,7, Ari E. Friedland1, Xuebing Wu2, Jonathan S. Gootenberg 3, Omar O. Abudayyeh4, Vic E. Myer1, Christopher J. Wilson 1 & Patrick D. Hsu1,8 Correction to: Nature Communications; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05391-2; published online 27 July 2018 The original HTML version of this Article incorrectly listed an affiliation of Josh Tycko as ‘Department of Genetics, Stanford 1234567890():,; University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA’, instead of the correct ‘Present address: Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA’. It also incorrectly listed an affiliation of this author as ‘Present address: Arrakis Therapeutics, 35 Gatehouse Dr., Waltham, MA, 02451, USA’. The original HTML version incorrectly listed an affiliation of Luis A. Barrera as ‘Present address: Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, CT, 06511, USA’, instead of the correct ‘Present address: Arrakis Therapeutics, 35 Gatehouse Dr., Waltham, MA 02451, USA’. Finally, the original HTML version incorrectly omitted an affiliation of Nicholas C. Huston: ‘Present address: Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511, USA’. This has been corrected in the HTML version of the Article. The PDF version was correct from the time of publication. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
    [Show full text]