DOCSLIB.ORG

Legal Framework for E-Research: Realising the Potential, Fitzgerald, Brian F., Eds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Legal Framework for E-Research: Realising the Potential, Fitzgerald, Brian F., Eds QUT Digital Repository: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/ (2008) Legal Framework for E-Research: Realising the Potential, Fitzgerald, Brian F., Eds. Sydney University Press. © Copyright 2008 Sydney University Press (Collection) / Individual authors (Papers) This work (with the exception of Chapter 2: The Fifth Dimension and Chapter 9: NIH Data and Resource Sharing, Data Release and Intellectual Property Policies for Genomics Community Resource Projects) is licensed under an Australian Creative Commons 'By Attribution', 'Non Commercial', 'No Derivative Works.' 2.5 Licence <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/au/>. See http://creativecommons.org.au/licences for more details. Chapter 2: The Fifth Dimension Licence Information Where copyright subsists in this chapter, which is a United States Government Work under s 105 of the U.S. Copyright Act, the work is licensed under a United States Creative Commons 'By Attribution' 3.0 License <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/>. Chapter 9: NIH Data and Resource Sharing, Data Release and Intellectual Property Policies for Genomics Community Resource Projects Licence Information Where copyright subsists in this chapter, which is a United States Government Work under s 105 of the U.S. Copyright Act, the work is licensed under a United States Creative Commons 'By Attribution' 3.0 License <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/>. LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR e-RESEARCH: REALISING THE POTENTIAL EDITED BY BRIAN FITZGERALD BA (Griff), LLB (Hons) (QUT), BCL (Oxon), LLM (Harv), PhD (Griff) Professor of Intellectual Property Law and Innovation (QUT Faculty of Law), Project Leader of the Legal Framework for e-Research Project Barrister, Supreme Court of Queensland and High Court of Australia SYDNEY UNIVERSITY PRESS Published by Sydney University Press University of Sydney NSW, 2006 Australia www.sup.usyd.edu.au Publication date: August 2008 © Copyright individual authors, 2008 © Sydney University Press 2008 The material in this publication is based on papers presented at the Legal Framework for e-Research International Congress convened by the Queensland University of Technology (http://www.qut.edu.au) at the Gold Coast, Australia, July 2007. This publication is an output of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) funded Legal Framework for e- Research Project led by Professor Brian Fitzgerald and based at the Queensland University of Technology. Licence information This work (with the exception of Chapter 2: The Fifth Dimension and Chapter 9: NIH Data and Resource Sharing, Data Release and Intellectual Property Policies for Genomics Community Resource Projects) is licensed under an Australian Creative Commons 'By Attribution', 'Non Commercial', 'No Derivative Works.' 2.5 Licence <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/au/>. See http://creativecommons.org.au/licences for more details. Chapter 2: The Fifth Dimension Licence Information Where copyright subsists in this chapter, which is a United States Government Work under s 105 of the U.S. Copyright Act, the work is licensed under a United States Creative Commons 'By Attribution' 3.0 License <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/>. Chapter 9: NIH Data and Resource Sharing, Data Release and Intellectual Property Policies for Genomics Community Resource Projects Licence Information Where copyright subsists in this chapter, which is a United States Government Work under s 105 of the U.S. Copyright Act, the work is licensed under a United States Creative Commons 'By Attribution' 3.0 License <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/>. ISBN 978-1920898-93-9 pbk ISBN 978-1-920899-16-5 hbk The digital version of this book is also available electronically through the Sydney eScholarship Repository (http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au) and The Queensland University of Technology ePrints Repository at: (http://eprints.qut.edu.au). iii PREFACE This book is the product of a conference that I convened at the Gold Coast Australia on the 11th and 12th of July 2007, titled Legal Framework for e-Research.1 The conference was undertaken as part of the research program of the Legal Framework for e-Research Project. The conference, the project and this book have been made possible with the support and sponsorship of the federal Department of Education Science and Training (DEST) which since 2008 has been restructured into the new departments of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) and Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (DIISR). In the process of running the conference and preparing this book for publication I am thankful for the tremendous support of Dr Evan Arthur, Margot Bell and Clare McLaughlin from DEST, Professor Tom Cochrane DVC QUT, Dr Terry Cutler (Cutler & Co.), Dr Mary O’Kane (O’Kane & Associates), Dr Fiona Stanley (Telethon Institute for Child Health), Dr Chris Greer (NSF), Claire Driscoll (NIH), Dr Richard Jefferson (CAMBIA), Dr Michael Spence Vice Chancellor University of Sydney, Professor John Unsworth (UIUC), Fred Friend (JISC), Steve Matheson (ABS), Paul Uhlir (National Academies) John Wilbanks (Science Commons), Professor Mark Perry (UWO), Dr Amanda McBratney and Malcolm McBratney (McCullough Robertson Lawyers), James Casey (UIDP), Adam Liberman (CSIRO), Andrew Hayne (OPC), David Ruschena (Health Legal), Professor Bernard Pailthorpe (UQ), Philip Crisp (AGS), Maree Heffernan (Qld Government), Professor Paul David (Stanford), the distinguished speakers and participants who attended the conference, my team at QUT, including Professor Anne Fitzgerald, Scott Kiel-Chisholm, Nic Suzor, Damien O’Brien, Kylie Pappalardo, Tanya Butkovsky, Amy Barker, Dr Annie Connell and Anthony Austin and the people at Sydney University Press especially Susan Murray-Smith and Ross Coleman. 1 For the full program see: <http://www.eresearch.law.qut.edu.au/conference> iv In particular I would like to acknowledge the work of my research assistant on this project, Celeste Bennett, who has done an excellent job on the chapters in this book. The Gold Coast conference was followed by the Australian National Summit on Open Access to Public Sector Information2 held at the Queensland Parliament House on the 13th of July 2007. Dr Cutler’s paper in this book is drawn from that event. This book aims to document the considerable insights and ideas that were offered at the Gold Coast conference. The majority of the papers in the book have been prepared as full academic papers (a number already published elsewhere) while others are shorter conference style papers with one being derived from a transcript of the proceedings. The Legal Framework for e-Research project is based at QUT and aims to enhance the enormous potential of e-Research by ensuring law can work as an enabler in this fast paced, networked and serendipitous environment. It grew out of a CODATA conference I attended at UNESCO in Paris in 2004 – International Workshop on the Information Commons for e-Science3 – and my realisation that we were not doing enough in this area in Australia. The project is due for completion in late 2008 and can only be seen as a precursor to the further work that will be done in this area. A national survey of attitudes and practices, the Gold Coast conference, a report on the legal framework for data management, this book and a high level international roundtable on negotiating and concluding collaborative research agreements held at QUT in June 2008 are major outputs of this project so far.4 2 For the full program see: http://datasmart.oesr.qld.gov.au/Events/datasmart.nsf/0/D2D95818B020049F4A25732C000 6EE9A/$FILE/Australian%20National%20Summit%20On%20Open%20Access%20Program .pdf?openelement For the Conference Report see: <http://www.qsic.qld.gov.au/QSIC/QSIC.nsf/0/D6C8E0616BC7FB414A2573B7000C42E5 /$FILE/Conference%20Report%20%20National%20Summit%20Open%20Access.pdf?opene lement> 3 See generally: <http://portal.unesco.org/es/ev.php- URL_ID=28723&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html> 4 See generally: <http://www.eresearch.law.qut.edu.au> v I hope you enjoy reading the material in this book and that it provides you with a framework for understanding key legal issues in the e- Research landscape. Professor Brian Fitzgerald Professor of Intellectual Property and Innovation QUT Law Faculty Project Leader Legal Framework for e-Research Project www.eresearch.law.qut.edu.au Brisbane, June 30 2008 vi FOREWORD The law famously trails behind the social and economic changes in human society which it is supposed to regulate. In a time of such rapid change as we have in the early 21st Century, efforts to reduce some of the undesirable outcomes of this lagging characteristic are to be commended, most particularly when those efforts are directed at improvements which are designed to support greater access to knowledge and the sharing of information in and among communities with increasingly complex problems requiring ever more urgent solution. It is a commonplace to claim that intellectual property laws are arcane. Nowhere is this more ably demonstrated than in the convoluted attempts to reform copyright law across a range of jurisdictions in the last decade. Australia is no small example, with amendments to the Copyright Act 1968 in 2000 designed to address the requirements of the digital environment, followed by a range of other changes including the significant realignment of Australian copyright law with that of the domestic United States’ legal environment brought about as a result of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement (2004). The failure of the law to keep pace with the real and dynamic changes in the virtual environments in which our educators, researchers, and citizens generally find themselves is understandable, as new ways of doing things arrive so quickly that it takes time for society at large to adequately comprehend and understand them. And, no sooner than one set of conditions has been understood, there arrive new and sometimes contradictory developments which demand a rethink of any regulatory creativity that might be based on the previous set of conditions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Making Grants to Solve Social and Environmental Problems at Home and Around the World
    Making grants to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world THE WILLIAM AND FLORA HEWLETT FOUNDATION 2008 Annual Report Forms of Philanthropic Support: The Centrality of Alignment* Paul Brest Nonprofit organizations are the core of civil society. Vibrant organizations require unrestricted capital and need excellent leaders with considerable autonomy to develop and implement their plans. But these organizations and their leaders also depend on funders, who have their own passions, goals, and ideas. How are the interests of donors and nonprofits reconciled in the philanthropic world? Some funders use the power of their purses to resolve the tension in a lopsided way that satisfies their egos but ultimately disserves society. They make small, short-term grants focused on narrowly defined concerns. They require organizations to jump through hoops during the application process, and then micromanage grantees’ activities. In fact, unrestricted, general operating support for organizations accounts for only about 19 percent of all foundation grant dollars.1 Concerned with the pervasive undercapitalization of nonprofit organizations, Independent Sector, Grantmakers for Effective Organizations, and the Nonprofit Finance Fund have strongly advocated that funders provide multi-year, renewable general support.2 At the same time, a small but increasing number of venture philanthropists are providing successful nonprofits the funds necessary to expand.3 Most venture philanthropists support organizations that provide services— education, after-school programs, visits by nurse practitioners. But general support is equally valuable for organizations engaged in research and advocacy, ranging from universities and think tanks to environmental organizations. For all of the value of general support, however, there are often good reasons to fund specific projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Content Licensing: Cultivating the Creative Commons
    Open Content Licensing: Cultivating the Creative Commons Principal Editor Professor Brian Fitzgerald Head of School of Law, Queensland University of Technology, Australia With the assistance of Jessica Coates and Suzanne Lewis Sydney Unversity Press Published in Sydney by Sydney University Press University of Sydney NSW 2006 AUSTRALIA Publication date: March 2007 The material in this publication is based on papers presented at the Open Content Licensing: Cultivating the Creative Commons conference held by the Queensland University of Technology (http://www.qut.edu.au) in Brisbane, Australia in January 2005. This publication is an output of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation (http://www.cci.edu.au), Queensland University of Technology. Unless otherwise stated, the law and services represented in these papers are discussed as they existed in February 2005. ISBN 10 1-920898-51-4 ISBN 13 978-1-920898-51-9 This work is licensed under an Australian Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/au/. For more information contact Professor Brian Fitzgerald, Faculty of Law, Queensland University of Technology. List of Contributors Richard Neville Professor Arun Sharma Mark Fallu Professor Barry Conyngham AM Greg Lane Professor Brian Fitzgerald Nic Suzor Professor Lawrence Lessig Professor Richard Jones Professor Greg Hearn Professor John Quiggin Dr David Rooney Neeru Paharia Michael Lavarch Stuart Cunningham Dr Terry Cutler Damien O’Brien
    [Show full text]
  • Thick Description of Peer Review Is Required
    Peer Review: Objectivity, Anonymity, Trust A Dissertation Presented by Hans Daniel Ucko to The Graduate School in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy Stony Brook University May 2020 Copyright by Hans Daniel Ucko 2020 Stony Brook University The Graduate School Hans Daniel Ucko We, the dissertation committee for the above candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy degree, hereby recommend acceptance of this dissertation. Robert Crease, Professor Department of Philosophy Anne O’Byrne Associate Professor Department of Philosophy Harvey Cormier Associate Professor Department of Philosophy George Sterman Distinguished Professor Department of Physics and Astronomy This dissertation is accepted by the Graduate School Eric Wertheimer Dean of the Graduate School ii Abstract of the Dissertation Peer Review: Objectivity, Anonymity, Trust by Hans Daniel Ucko Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy Stony Brook University 2020 Objectivity is a concept that looms large over science. As a society we approve of objective approaches, methods, and attitudes. Objectivity can mean a lot of things: a correspondence with reality, a reliable epistemological process, or an attitude or stance of a scientist. Peer review is an important part of scientific evaluation. Results do not count as science until they are made public, or published. The means by which scientific manuscripts are found to be suitable for publication is peer review, in which usually an editor consults one or more referees to ask for a judgment on the scientific work by an author or authors. These referees are asked to be representatives of a community, that is, they are asked for an objective evaluation not only from their standpoint but instead standing in for an entire community.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Gaming License, Version 1.0A
    LEGAL INFORMATION Permission to copy, modify and distribute the files collectively known as the System Reference Document (“SRD”) is granted solely through the use of the Open Gaming License, Version 1.0a. This material is being released using the Open Gaming License Version 1.0a and you should read and understand the terms of that license before using this material. The text of the Open Gaming License itself is not Open Game Content. Instructions on using the License are provided within the License itself. The following items are designated Product Identity, as defined in Section 1(e) of the Open Game License Version 1.0a, and are subject to the conditions set forth in Section 7 of the OGL, and are not Open Content: Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Dungeon Master, Monster Manual, d20 System, Wizards of the Coast, d20 (when used as a trademark), Forgotten Realms, Faerûn, character names (including those used in the names of spells or items), places, Red Wizard of Thay, Heroic Domains of Ysgard, Ever-Changing Chaos of Limbo, Windswept Depths of Pandemonium, Infinite Layers of the Abyss, Tarterian Depths of Carceri, Gray Waste of Hades, Bleak Eternity of Gehenna, Nine Hells of Baator, Infernal Battlefield of Acheron, Clockwork Nirvana of Mechanus, Peaceable Kingdoms of Arcadia, Seven Mounting Heavens of Celestia, Twin Paradises of Bytopia, Blessed Fields of Elysium, Wilderness of the Beastlands, Olympian Glades of Arborea, Concordant Domain of the Outlands, Sigil, Lady of Pain, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, beholder, gauth, carrion crawler, tanar’ri, baatezu, displacer beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid, umber hulk, yuan-ti.
    [Show full text]
  • This Material Is Covered by the Open Gaming License
    LEGAL INFORMATION Permission to copy, modify and distribute the files collectively known as the System Reference Document (“SRD”) is granted solely through the use of the Open Gaming License, Version 1.0a. This material is being released using the Open Gaming License Version 1.0a and you should read and understand the terms of that license before using this material. The text of the Open Gaming License itself is not Open Game Content. Instructions on using the License are provided within the License itself. The following items are designated Product Identity, as defined in Section 1(e) of the Open Game License Version 1.0a, and are subject to the conditions set forth in Section 7 of the OGL, and are not Open Content: Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Dungeon Master, Monster Manual, d20 System, Wizards of the Coast, d20 (when used as a trademark), Forgotten Realms, Faerûn, character names (including those used in the names of spells or items), places, Red Wizard of Thay, Heroic Domains of Ysgard, Ever-Changing Chaos of Limbo, Windswept Depths of Pandemonium, Infinite Layers of the Abyss, Tarterian Depths of Carceri, Gray Waste of Hades, Bleak Eternity of Gehenna, Nine Hells of Baator, Infernal Battlefield of Acheron, Clockwork Nirvana of Mechanus, Peaceable Kingdoms of Arcadia, Seven Mounting Heavens of Celestia, Twin Paradises of Bytopia, Blessed Fields of Elysium, Wilderness of the Beastlands, Olympian Glades of Arborea, Concordant Domain of the Outlands, Sigil, Lady of Pain, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, beholder, gauth, carrion crawler, tanar’ri, baatezu, displacer beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid, umber hulk, yuan-ti.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Precision FDA, an Online Platform for Crowdsourcing Genomics Jordan Paradise Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, [email protected]
    Loyola University Chicago, School of Law LAW eCommons Faculty Publications & Other Works 2018 Exploring Precision FDA, an Online Platform for Crowdsourcing Genomics Jordan Paradise Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lawecommons.luc.edu/facpubs Part of the Administrative Law Commons, and the Food and Drug Law Commons Recommended Citation Jordan Paradise, Exploring Precision FDA, an Online Platform for Crowdsourcing Genomics, 58 Jurimetrics J. 267-282 (2018) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications & Other Works by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXPLORING PRECISION FDA, AN ONLINE PLATFORM FOR CROWDSOURCING GENOMICS Jordan Paradise* ABSTRACT: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has created an online platform for the next generation sequencing community, enabling users to evaluate biomarker in- formation and share resources. This article examines this online platform and offers sev- eral observations about potential legal and regulatory implications. CITATION: Jordan Paradise, Exploring PrecisionFDA, an Online Platform for CrowdsourcingGenomics, 58 JuRIMETRIcS J. 267-282 (2018). Precision medicine is here, with rapid advancements in the technologies, tools, and life-saving products entering the market for the treatment of serious and life-threatening disease. In May 2017, the United States Food and Drug Ad- ministration (FDA) approved the first cancer treatment for solid tumors based on a genetic biomarker rather than the tissue of origin.1 One month later, the agency approved a companion diagnostic panel that uses next generation se- quencing (NGS) to simultaneously screen a genetic sample for 23 cancer genes, three of which have FDA-approved therapies for non-small cell lung cancer.2 *Georgia Reithal Professor of Law, Loyola University Chicago School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Innovation and External Sources of Innovation. an Opportunity to Fuel
    Schuhmacher et al. J Transl Med (2018) 16:119 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-018-1499-2 Journal of Translational Medicine REVIEW Open Access Open innovation and external sources of innovation. An opportunity to fuel the R&D pipeline and enhance decision making? Alexander Schuhmacher1* , Oliver Gassmann2, Nigel McCracken3 and Markus Hinder4 Abstract Historically, research and development (R&D) in the pharmaceutical sector has predominantly been an in-house activity. To enable investments for game changing late-stage assets and to enable better and less costly go/no-go decisions, most companies have employed a fail early paradigm through the implementation of clinical proof-of-con- cept organizations. To fuel their pipelines, some pioneers started to complement their internal R&D eforts through collaborations as early as the 1990s. In recent years, multiple extrinsic and intrinsic factors induced an opening for external sources of innovation and resulted in new models for open innovation, such as open sourcing, crowdsourc- ing, public–private partnerships, innovations centres, and the virtualization of R&D. Three factors seem to determine the breadth and depth regarding how companies approach external innovation: (1) the company’s legacy, (2) the company’s willingness and ability to take risks and (3) the company’s need to control IP and competitors. In addition, these factors often constitute the major hurdles to efectively leveraging external opportunities and assets. Conscious and diferential choices of the R&D and business models for diferent companies and diferent divisions in the same company seem to best allow a company to fully exploit the potential of both internal and external innovations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future Role of HPC in Medical Product Decision Making
    The Future Role of HPC in Medical Product Decision Making LLNL-TR-690736 This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, nor any of their employees makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes. This work performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344. 1 Summary Report on a Workshop on the Future Role of High Performance Computing in Medical Product Decision Making Abstract On September 10, 2015, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s Center for Global Security Research1 and High Performance Computing Innovation Center2 hosted a workshop in Silver Spring, Maryland, on the “Future Role of High Performance Computing (HPC) in Medical Product Decision Making.” Stakeholders from academia, industry, national laboratories and government agencies attended and discussed the role of HPC in making regulatory decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Niva Elkin-Koren* Creative Commons Is a Non-Profit US-Based
    ELKIN-KOREN – DRAFT FEBRUARY 14, 2006 2006 EXPLORING CREATIVE COMMONS 1 EXPLORING CREATIVE COMMONS: A SKEPTICAL VIEW OF A WORTHY PURSUIT THE FUTURE OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN (P. Bernt Hugenholtz & Lucie Guibault, eds.) Kluwer Law International, forthcoming 2006. Niva Elkin-Koren* I. INTRODUCTION Creative Commons is a non-profit US-based organization, which operates a licensing platform to promote free use of creative works. This innovative initiative is using license agreements for the purpose of strengthening the public domain. The high cost associated with securing a license to use works becomes a serious obstacle for the use and reuse of works created by others. By reducing the legal costs associated with the use of creative content, Creative Commons seeks to make it easier for non-profit players to engage in creative enterprises. The licensing platform aims at lowering the transaction costs of both licensing and acquiring a license for reuse. At the producer's end, authors are offered a licensing scheme for distributing their works for non-commercial use while at the same time safeguarding those works against abuse and misappropriation of their efforts by asserting copyrights. The idea is to facilitate the release of creative works under generous license terms that would make works available for sharing and reuse. At the users' end, the platform is expected to make it easier for prospective creators to identify works, which are available under generous terms, for subsequent creation. Creative Commons advocates the use of copyrights in a rather subversive way that would ultimately change their meaning. Its strategy does not aim at creating a public domain, at least not in the strict legal sense of a regime that is free of any exclusive proprietary rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Content - Bestandsaufnahme Und Versuch Einer Definition
    Open Content - Bestandsaufnahme und Versuch einer Definition Diplomarbeit im Fach Informatik Vorgelegt von Andreas John Waldeyerstr. 12, 10247 Berlin Matrikelnummer: 181939 Angefertigt am Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik und Quantitative Methoden der Technischen Universität Berlin, Fakultät IV (Informatik) Prof. Dr. iur. Bernd Lutterbeck Betreuer: Matthias Bärwolf Abgabe der Arbeit: 14.02.2006 Open Content - Seite 2 I. Zusammenfassung Unter dem Schlagwort Open Content soll der Erfolg von Open-Source-Software auf andere Werkgattungen übertragen werden. Aufwind erhält die Idee des Open Content durch die zunehmende Ausweitung und Befestigung des geistigen Eigentums durch Recht und Architektur, die sich konträr zu den Möglichkeiten digitaler Technologien und weltweiten Networkings verhält. Um Autoren und Künstlern eine klar erkennbare Alternative zu diesen Entwicklungen zu bieten, soll diese Arbeit helfen, den immer noch verschwommenen Begriff Open Content zu schärfen. Anhand einer strukturierten Beobachtung potenzieller Open-Content- Phänomene und eines Vergleiches mit Open-Source-Software wird gezeigt: Hauptthese: Die Prinzipien von Open-Source-Software lassen sich nur dann sinnvoll auf andere Werkgattungen übertragen, wenn die Eigenschaften von OSS nicht formal übernommen, sondern in den Kontext der anderen Werkgattungen übersetzt werden. Auf Basis der gewonnenen Erkenntnisse wird ein Definitionsentwurf im Sinne einer Übersetzung zur Diskussion gestellt. Konsequenz dieser Übersetzung ist u.a., dass Modifizierbarkeit und kommerzielle Nutzung und Verwertung keine konstituierenden Eigenschaften von Open Content sind. Der Definitionsentwurf lautet im Volltext: Definitionsentwurf: Open Content sind schöpferische Werke, wie z.B. Bilder, Musik oder Artikel, mit Ausnahme von Software, die derart veröffentlicht wurden, dass sie ohne die Erlaubnis eines anderen oder durch eine neutral erteilte Erlaubnis an jedermann konsumiert, zitiert und mindestens nichtkommerziell kopiert und verbreitet werden können.
    [Show full text]
  • What Contracts Cannot Do: the Limits of Private Ordering in Facilitating a Creative Commons
    Fordham Law Review Volume 74 Issue 2 Article 3 2005 What Contracts Cannot Do: The Limits of Private Ordering in Facilitating a Creative Commons Niva Elkin-Koren Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Niva Elkin-Koren, What Contracts Cannot Do: The Limits of Private Ordering in Facilitating a Creative Commons , 74 Fordham L. Rev. 375 (2005). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol74/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. What Contracts Cannot Do: The Limits of Private Ordering in Facilitating a Creative Commons Cover Page Footnote Professor, University of Haifa School of Law. I wish to thank Yochai Benkler, Michael Birnhack, Julie Cohen, Rochelle Dryfuss, Kevin Davis, Bernt Hugenholtz, Mathias Klang, Lawrence Lessig, Jessica Litman, Neil Netanel, David Nimmer, Helen Nissenbaum, Gideon Parchomovsky, Eli Salzberger, Anthony Reese, Pamela Samuelson, Katrina Wyman, and Diane Zimmerman for their comments and criticism on an earlier draft. I also thank the participants at the IViR workshop on Commodification of Information, Amsterdam, July 2004, the Colloquium on Information Technology and Society, Information Law Institute, NYU School of Law and UCLA, and the participants of faculty workshops at the University of Connecticut Law School, Georgetown University Law Center, and NYU School of Law for helpful comments and discussions.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Tabletop Role-Playing Games
    This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Routledge in Role-Playing Game Studies: Transmedia Foundations on April 4, 2018, available online: https://www.routledge.com/Role-Playing-Game-Studies-Transmedia- Foundations/Deterding-Zagal/p/book/9781138638907 Please cite as: William J. White; Jonne Arjoranta; Michael Hitchens; Jon Peterson; Evan Torner; Jonathan Walton (2018). Tabletop Role-Playing Games. In Zagal, José P. and Deterding, S. (eds.), Role-Playing Game Studies: Transmedia Foundations. New York: Routledge, 63-86. 4 Tabletop Role-Playing Games William J. White; Jonne Arjoranta; Michael Hitchens; Jon Peterson; Evan Torner; Jonathan Walton This chapter discusses tabletop role-playing games (TRPGs), sometimes also called “pen and paper” RPGs to distinguish them from their compatriot media, primarily the computer role-playing game (CRPG) and live action role-playing game (LARP). Once some preliminary matters of definition and description are taken care of, the discussion in this chapter proceeds largely along historical lines, presenting TRPGs as (1) originating in the early 1970s with the publication of Dungeons & Dragons and its early offshoots, imitators, and derivations and (2) developing in variety through the 1980s and 1990s as designers sought to emulate different fictional settings and genres as well as explore various game-mechanical approaches before (3) experiencing a period of “mainstream” consolidation and 1 countervailing “indie” experimentation in the first years of the 21st century. It concludes with an attempt to discern the direction of future developments, as the arrival of crowdfunding, print-on-demand, and other Internet-enabled publishing tools change the face of the industry. The historical arc traced here draws in large measure upon two recent histories of the origins of TRPGs, Peterson’s Playing at the World (Peterson 2012) and Appelcline’s multi-volume Designers and Dragons (Appelcline 2013).
    [Show full text]