Letter: Copywrongs

March 15, 2002

If the working paper on the exploitation of public-sector information is converted into a European Union directive, it spells the end of debate about copyright in higher education research ("Worry at access to fruits of research", THES , March 1). This is because there is, in effect, no copyright, but an open door.

There are many arguments against the proposal: it will reduce university research and development; companies will be reluctant to invest in HE-based research; how is commercial confidentiality defined?

It poses a potential legal nightmare. By effectively abolishing copyright, patenting is encouraged. The implications of this needs further exploration as does the complex issue of prior publication. A prior publication invalidates a patent application. If a third party demands, under the proposed law, to inspect documents (results, say) from a higher education project that might result in a patent later down the line, that is arguably prior publication, so no patent can then result.

The authors of the working paper have not thought their ideas through fully.

Charles Oppenheim
Loughborough University

Please login or register to read this article.

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments


Featured jobs