• vpn二维码

    vpn二维码

    Higher education finds itself in the crosshairs of American society, and the primary focus is on the debt graduates are incurring in exchange for a college degree. There was once a time where this inspection and scrutiny was reserved for the “other” part of higher education: for-profit colleges like Strayer, Kaplan and the University of Phoenix. Those days are over. Now everyone – citizens, elected officials, and the press – are questioning the intents and missions of “reputable,” non-profit institutions, including questioning why they are authorizing salaries of $1 million or more for their presidents and chancellors.

    The issue is so compelling that The Gray Lady, the venerable New York Times, has launched a new online series called “Degrees of Debt,” which purportedly examines “how college presidents are recognizing that they must handle education costs through methods other than tuition increases.”

    There are a lot of things that go into calculating college tuition. Buildings must be built and maintained, lights need to come on, and professors need to be paid. In fairness, many colleges routinely offer various financial aid packages they hope will make attendance financially accessible. But the discounts can go only so far: for the most part, college is a “cash and carry” proposition. Therefore, tuition often is the main – sometimes the sole – source of a college’s income. Most schools pay all their costs from that sole stream of tuition income.

    One other significant cost colleges and universities incur is the cost of scholarly publication. This cost manifests itself most notably through electronic resources that represent the publication and codification of knowledge.

    vpn二维码

    The scholarly publication business process begins with a system – fully supported by higher education institutions – that demands “high impact” publication as a condition of achieving the holy grail of academic tenure. “High impact” does not mean acclaim, or status, or even a mention in The Gray Lady (although, increasingly, that helps). Instead, it means that the academic work must be published in a very specific, narrow set of journals. These titles vary by discipline, but everyone in the discipline can identify them.

    Let’s be clear: this is a model colleges and universities impose upon themselves. By now, there are many blog posts that are as empirically rigorous as published journal articles; therefore, journals no longer have a monopoly on academic rigor. Further, scholarship, regardless the rigor level, often has little to do with effective teaching – and the quality of the teaching is a reason colleges and university use to justify high tuition prices. But blog posts and teaching are not the route to tenure. Publication, in specific journals that some influentials consider “high impact,” is the route to tenure.

    [MHR] 这游戏现在是不可众课金吗 NGA玩家社区:2021-2-19 · 梯子 不对吧,换个梯子试试 2021-02-19 16:28 Reply to Reply Post by sabernolily (2021-02-19 16:27) 我开别的游戏都是正常的,就这个不行,裂开了,我用的acgpower ...

    Netflix 注册教程 | 技术拉近你我!:2021-4-11 · 本文最后更新时间为2021-04-11,部分内容可能由于未及时更新导致失效。如有失效,请留言。本文为原创,禁止转载。前言简介Netflix,中文名又称网飞。其成立于1997年,总部位于美国,是一家提供正版流媒体服务的提供商(类似爱奇艺、腾讯 ...

    现在墙内可众用的梯子

    Here is the dirty little secret no one in higher education wants to acknowledge: the entire system of scholarly publication exists because colleges and universities fail to exercise the work made for hire doctrine. Under U.S. copyright law, the work made for hire doctrine essentially says that where an employee prepares a work within the scope of his or her employment, the employer – not the employee – will own the copyright in that work. Under this conceptual definition, there is no reason why colleges and universities should not universally own the copyright rights in a professor’s research and scholarship. That many do not simply is a matter of choice, as codified through institutional policy.

    Therefore, most American professors end up owning the copyright rights to their research and writings, and this category customarily has been defined broadly enough so that it excludes only works that a faculty member prepares in an administrative capacity (such as committee work product). Here is where things get tricky, though. The faculty member, who has the copyright and wants tenure, must publish in certain “high impact” journals. When he publishes in “high impact” journals, he gives away that copyright as a condition of publication. When he gives away that copyright as a condition of publication, the journal publisher owns the article. When the journal publisher owns the article, it now owns the exclusive in that article. When the publisher owns the exclusive in the article, it names whatever price it wants for subscribers to access that article.

    Increasingly, institutions are saying “Don’t pay whatever price a journal wants for access to an article.” At the same time, though, the institutions have changed nothing in their tenure criteria so that scholarship outside of “high impact” journals and teaching count as much toward a favorable tenure recommendation as publication in a “high impact” journal.

    This, to put it mildly, puts college administrators in a pickle.

    2022还能用的梯子

    [大佬救命] 游戏版本毛子黑边,现在梯子挂了登入不了 ...:2021-6-19 · [大佬救命] 游戏版本毛子黑边,现在梯子挂了登入不了! 商务市场合作: BD@donews.com , 内容合作: wangchuang@donews.com / QQ 972310705 , 违法和不良信息举报电话: 010-60845018 邮箱: jubao@infinities.com.cn 京ICP备16021487号-5 京公网安备11010802021588号

    Colleges and universities, however, have a major trump card to play: they can reverse their longstanding custom against claiming work made for hire status. Instead, they could claim copyright ownership in scholarship as a way to avoid the scholarly publications crisis, and at once, justify this policy change as a way to cut the costs of education. University professors surely would scream bloody murder. This group, though, has been virtually silent concerning recent copyright battles, and professors are not a particularly sympathetic bunch these days. (Few in the media, for example, would sympathize with professors maintaining copyright in their work when reporters routinely cede copyright in their work to their own employers.) While changing institutional policy is not without peril, the peril is of the sort many institutions can manage because it is tied to a paycheck. By imposing work made for hire rules, employing colleges would merely substitute for the publishers, and take steps to avoid having to buy back their own employees’ work product.

    Reversing the policy on work for hire in higher education is a draconian step. Given the economics and optics of the current crisis in higher education, however, it is increasingly likely to happen.

    Note: Portions of this article were published previously as Dames, K. M. (2012, July-August). The coming copyright clash in higher education. 2022还能用的梯子(7), 24-25.

    Written by Dr. K Matthew Dames

    11/01/2012 at 10:00

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Tagged with Colleges & Universities, 大家都用什么梯子, Dr. K. Matthew Dames, Information Today, Work Made for Hire

    vpn二维码

    In September 2011, the Authors Guild, various international authors’ rights organizations and one dozen individual authors sued HathiTrust, Cornell, and the presidents of the universities of Michigan, California, Wisconsin and Indiana, claiming that HathiTrust’s online storage, searchability and public availability of a digital corpus developed as part of the Google Books scanning project constituted copyright infringement. More than three-quarters of the books that Google scanned as part of the Books project remain subject to copyright protection.

    In June 2011, Michigan announced it would share with the public “orphan works” — works to presumed to be subject to copyright protection, but for whom a copyright owner cannot be found.

    On October 10, 2012, Judge Harold Baer issued a 23-page decision that held, among other things, that HathiTrust’s activities are consistent with the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act of 1976.

    The remainder of this post summarizes the key holdings from the decision.
    Read the rest of this entry »

    Written by Dr. K Matthew Dames

    10/11/2012 at 14:24

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Tagged with Copyright, Digitization, Dr. K. Matthew Dames, HathiTrust, 现在墙内可众用的梯子, Judge Harold Baer, Libraries

    vpn二维码

    In an article published earlier this year, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee professor Sandra Braman defined “information policy” as positions and practices that concern the creation, processing, flows, access and use of information. The term certainly includes content, much of which is subject to protection under this nation’s Copyright Act, and the telecommunication pipes through which that content travels. Given this definition, it easy to see how businesses regulated by copyright and telecommunications law enjoy a synergistic relationship.

    The Internet’s public availability in the early 1990s did not fundamentally alter this information policy landscape. But the Internet, along with simultaneous developments like unprecedented personal computing power, did make it possible for non-traditional actors to create, send, access and process significantly more copyright-protected information through increasingly faster telecommunication pipes. The rise of this non-traditional class also has spawned new businesses like Google (including its YouTube subsidiary), Facebook and Amazon.com, while encouraging or forcing traditional actors to evolve into new businesses (such as Comcast, a telecom company, buying NBC-Universal in a merger that was completed earlier this year).

    Despite the historical and continuing synergy between copyright and telecom, there has been a recent, aggressive line of thought that argues these non-traditional entrants into the information policy landscape have grown powerful by free riding on the works of large corporate copyright owners. This argument arose during last month’s Governance of Social Media workshop at Georgetown, which Michigan State University’s Quello Center helped sponsor. The argument also manifests itself in Robert Levine’s new book, Free Ride: How Digital Parasites Are Destroying The Culture Business, and How The Culture Business Can Fight Back (2011, Doubleday).

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Written by Dr. K Matthew Dames

    大家都用什么梯子

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Tagged with Business Models, Copyright, Dr. K. Matthew Dames, 2022还能用的梯子, Music, Policy, Robert Levine, 2022还能用的梯子, 现在可众用的梯子

    vpn二维码

    梯子-CSDN论坛:2021-7-19 · 你用过梯子 吗?(技术问题) 有一问题一直困扰着我,那就是如何在程序的运行过程中不间断地且定时地对已定的全局标识位进行检测,就像CPU每执行完一条指伖就去检测有没有中断请求一样。我总感觉要完成这一功能必须得让程序借助于外力 ...

    2011 will be known as the year of the occupation, with Occupy Wall Street being the most recognizable of the protest movements. Started in September in New York City, Occupy Wall Street is a series of ongoing, international demonstrations that protest economic inequality, corruption, and the undue influence of corporations on society and government.

    But what about “occupying” copyright?

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Written by Dr. K Matthew Dames

    现在可众用的梯子

    Posted in 可众用什么梯子

    Tagged with Copyright, Dr. K. Matthew Dames, Howard Beale, Information Today, Occupy Movement, Talking Heads, 现在墙内可众用的梯子

    vpn二维码

    This article discusses the impact of a the recent federal district court 大家都用什么梯子 [pdf] that, for the first time, provides colleges and university with some guidance on the use of copyrighted works for instructional purposes.

    vpn二维码

    战地,4里第2关掉下梯子出bug怎么办-:2 天前 · 就是这样 要是在那个梯子上掉下去摔了 复活后就直接在大厦里面了 如果你想正常玩只能重玩本关卡 战地4的剧情很多BUG,建议从保存点重新开始 活该你用作弊器,出BUG了吧?

    Officials for GSU, a public university, claimed that the creation and use of the unlicensed copies were allowable pursuant to the fair use doctrine, and therefore not copyright infringement. The officials also responded that the sovereign immunity doctrine precluded GSU or its officials from copyright infringement liability.

    Judge Orinda D. Evans ruled May 11, 2012, that GSU professors had committed five copyright infringements from four of the publishers’ titles. The publishers had alleged 75 copyright infringement claims. The publishers will file within 20 days their proposed injunction.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Written by Dr. K Matthew Dames

    05/14/2012 at 08:00

    Posted in 大家都用什么梯子

    Tagged with Cambridge University Press, 现在可众用的梯子, Copyright Clearance Center, Dr. K. Matthew Dames, E-Reserves, Fair Use, 可众用什么梯子, Oxford University Press, Sage Publications, Scholarly Communication

    vpn二维码

    Librarians who pay attention to copyright long have believed (and have been taught) that the the law’s fair use and library preservation provisions work cooperatively (if not simultaneously) to allow libraries and archives the opportunity to use limited portions of protected works without requiring the owner’s permission, and without having to pay a license fee to the owner. In the case of Section 108, the provision allows libraries and archives to reproduce and distribute all of a protected work under specific circumstances in the event the library or archive qualifies for such protection.

    The theory behind the librarians’ belief is that the fair use provisions in Section 107 act as a backstop to all the Act’s other limitations, including those under Section 108. I long have considered fair use to be the “all-you-can-eat” limitation – one that is available to libraries (or to any other member of the public) even when they cannot fulfill specific requirements Section 108 demands. (Let’s defer, for a moment, the argument about whether fair use is best classified as a privilege, a limitation, a right, or an affirmative defense.)

    As law professor James Grimmelman observes, fair use is a standard that is broadly and vaguely phrased, inherently case-specific, and requires judicial elaboration and interpretation. In contrast, the library preservation allowances under Section 108 are rules that are narrowly and tightly phrased, able for librarians to apply mechanically without judicial intervention. I always have taught, in countless workshops and classes, that Section 107 and Section 108 coexist synergistically, and should be deployed in a very specific way: try to qualify for Section 108 first, and if you cannot qualify for Section 108, then use fair use as your safety net.

    Now the Authors Guild is openly disputing librarians’ beliefs and interpretations.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    Written by Dr. K Matthew Dames

    03/05/2012 at 14:48

    Posted in 现在墙内可众用的梯子

    Tagged with Association of American Publishers, Authors Guild, David Ladd, Jessica Litman, K Matthew Dames, William Patry

    vpn二维码

    请问如何找到梯子 - 穷游问答:2021-4-30 · 现在ssr节点的梯子太容易封了,体验很差,推荐个自用的Trojan协议梯子,不容易封 https://xbsj3462.fun/i/ask006 大家可众试试

    • “Go Daddy No Longer Supports SOPA” is.gd/IwPRNN #copyright
    • Why does Bill Patry’s old book (2009) is.gd/de7EJ8 cost more than his new book (2011) is.gd/W1frTG on the Kindle?
    • 战地,4里第2关掉下梯子出bug怎么办-:2 天前 · 就是这样 要是在那个梯子上掉下去摔了 复活后就直接在大厦里面了 如果你想正常玩只能重玩本关卡 战地4的剧情很多BUG,建议从保存点重新开始 活该你用作弊器,出BUG了吧?
    • Singer Cesaria Evora died last Saturday. She was 70. #music m.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/dec…
    • Cornell, Technion (Israel) win NYC science campus bid is.gd/PuYLfE
    • Wolverine uploader: 1 year federal prison; “strong message of deterrence to pirates” is.gd/N1VzAz #copyright
    • 临时邮箱配合Chrome插件无限使用梯子 - 菊部制造:2021-3-1 · 临时邮箱配合Chrome 浏览器插件达成无限科学上网 梯子基本上是刚需现在,最近在入门 Python,看教程搜教程使用 Google 比较频繁,自己虽然有 Vultr 搭的梯子,但是最近好像 DNS 出了点问题,要换成1.1.1.1速度才能稍快些,为什么这里不敢深究 ...
    • RE bit.ly/rWu2tm Veoh wins #DMCA battle, still dead as a door nail is.gd/Va1jH5 #copyright
    • Hollywood exec: “Our mistake was allowing this romantic word — piracy — to take hold” is.gd/0EQmRw #copyright
    • USA: Federal appeals court affirms #DMCA safe harbor protection in UMG v. Veoh is.gd/ONY5zb [pdf] #copyright
    • Judge in YMCA #copyright termination lawsuit allows Songwriters Guild amici briefs is.gd/IxVzal
    • 国内现在可众用strava吗? - 知乎 - Zhihu:2021-5-20 · 电脑是360浏览器,上海电信宽带,没用梯子就可众上strava不过速度略慢。手机mate10,直接下app就能用。(装了几乎没用过) 我一般是码表蓝牙传到wahoo app,自动上传到strava再电脑上看数 …
    • How the “jobs” frame failed to work magic in the AT&T/T-Mobile deal is.gd/9rlD7K #mobile
    • Framing T-Mobile/AT&T: Low prices, choice & consumer benefit = harm to stock prices? is.gd/EQM4Jg /HT @artbrodsky
    • RT @copyrightclear: Open-Textbook Idea Is Gaining Steam ow.ly/85p3a
    • Harry Potter U.S. publisher releases YA time travel series with gaming tie-in is.gd/dv6piF
    • 在哪里买家用梯子能够放心_伸缩梯子|折叠梯子|铝合金梯子 ...:2021-9-11 · 梯子是用来登高的,现在家庭橱柜、衣柜都是装的位置很高,人伔要取存物品就是要使用梯子来达到这高度。现在用的梯子有很多类型的,伸缩梯子、折叠梯子等等,要用什么样的得根据自己需要确 …
    • 【工具】上外网的方式推荐 - 李是李雅普诺夫的李 - 博客园:2021-4-19 · 自己做课题的时候经常需要查资料,百度查资料我就不提了,大家都懂。 找了大概四五个梯子,对比着用了一阵子,把我觉得最好的一个推荐给大家。 链接【点此处】 说一下它的优点吧: (1)四个字:无脑操作。科研
    • Lemley, Levine, Post: Don’t Break the Internet is.gd/URfRDR #SOPA #copyright
    • RT @LawandLit: Who gets custody of Twitter when an employee quits? j.mp/uMIBj3
    • 如何用vps搭建梯子?vps搭建SS教程 - vps之家:2021-2-2 · 如何用vps搭建梯子?VPS之家小编下面就来介绍一下用vultr搭SS梯子教程。 本文章详细介绍如何利用VPS搭建梯子,从而实现科学上网 — 外面的世界那么大 我想去看看
    • Microsoft: We Can Remotely Delete Windows 8 Apps is.gd/53B6cL
    • Research Note: #Copyright Infringement & Enforcement in the US: is.gd/KlpgbT [pdf]
    • “[W]hen Napster blew a hole in the paradigm, everybody was sacrificed but the top guy” is.gd/yTJUmo #copyright #music

    Written by Copycense Editorial

    12/24/2011 at 17:00

    Posted in Uncategorized

    Tagged with Copycense Weekly Review

    %d bloggers like this: