Second Basket’s Negative Impact

Second Basket limits the circulation of sci-entific documents and will substantially reduce scientific communication among researchers. For example, libraries or other document providers may send copies elec-tronically (e.g., in PDF format) only if the publisher of a particular work does not itself offer the work online in a clear manner and on reasonable terms. In principle, the Copyright Act strengthens the protection of authors ’ intellectual rights; however, most scientists do not want this protection if it comes at the expense of efficient and effec-tive circulation of scientific information. Effective science relies on effective com-munication, often quantified by the term “impact ” (1). Who is really protected by limiting the circulation of scientific knowledge? Publishers benefit most. The Copyright Act requires them to deliver scientific work on “reasonable terms, ” making possible a wide spectrum of business terms and con-ditions. Transfer agreements allow publish-ers to claim the copyright. A paradoxical situation emerges: National research foun-dations pay scientists to write papers, but the scientists must transfer the copyrights and then buy back their own papers in order to provide access to them. The international community should create a suitable frame-work for international copyrights in a net-worked world (2)