Idea: style publication of all publicly funded research. Means: when you derive something new from publicly funded research you MUST make it available to the public too so that others can build upon it.

Would also mean that publicly funded research can be used to invalidate patents and other exclusive rights ;)

@jwildeboer This isn't the case for *all* publicly funded R&D, but @NGIZero does require it, and so do others. I wholeheartedly approve of that!

@jwildeboer why only publicly funded research? Why not all research?

@jwildeboer I suppose this would put scientists at a difficult position. There are a lot that goes into selecting where and how to publish research and that factors into keeping your job. This could thus push scientists towards citing "closed" articles only and open articles remaining uncited.

That's to say, this has the same problem with free software, which is restricting its users rather than expressly going after the system that's the source of corruption.

@cadadr It wouldn’t be too complicated to have open access publication as a non-negotiable requirement for grants.

@jwildeboer That's for sure, and I'm totally behind that, and that already happens.

What I mean is, pushing researchers into a choice re: what they can cite has the attached risk of diminishing the reach of ethical research, as the system is corrupt and broken.

@jwildeboer The move towards proper open access is happening, we're developing things like registered reports and open peer review, and I doubt there's reason to divide that push with something like this. And we've seen activism like Sci-Hub and libgen, efforts like Retraction Watch, and unis and govts ending contracts with the likes of Elsevier over fees has achieved a lot. I doubt something anti-pragmatic like copyleft can add much, but I am sure it can subtract a lot.

@cadadr privatising and proprietarising publicly funded research through patents and other exclusive rights also has a net negative effect IMHO.

@jwildeboer Well now that the EU has decided that news citations are covered by copyright, all you need to do is angle that your journal counts as "news" and license any citations under CC-BY-SA.

Unfortunately the shitty journals will just copy the legal basis but demand a payout for citations.

@jwildeboer Yes. This would encourage cooperation and move research towards what was supposed to be. Copyleft can be very powerful when used broadly.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Mastodon instance for people with Wildeboer as their last name