Wired News: Evolutionists Are Wrong!
Of course, the difference in this case is that it isn't a "fair use" issue, since they wish to use the bulk of the scientists' work for the textbooks, and most authors do not wish their work to be associated with hand waving hokey nonsense, and thus have the right to opt out of such associations. It is quite interesting that copyright law is being used to assure the "moral rights" of the authors' works, which is far different from using copyright law as a club (a la RIAA and MPAA) to take Grannies and 12 year olds to court.
Wired News: Evolutionists Are Wrong!:
Where are the copyright liberals when right-wing conservatives need us?
Last week, the National Academy of Sciences, or NAS, joined with the National Science Teachers Association, or NSTA, to tell the Kansas State Board of Education that it would not grant the state copyright permission to incorporate its science education standards manuals into the state's public school science curriculum because Kansas plans to teach students that "intelligent design" is a viable alternative theory to evolution. Kansas is scrambling to rewrite its proposal to win over the NAS and NSTA.
I agree with the vast majority of scientists who believe that evolution is the strongest and most comprehensive explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. I also agree with the vast majority of scientists who think that intelligent design, the theory that the complexity of life must be derived at least in part from a supernatural intelligence, is junk. I support the two scientific organizations in their mission of teaching legitimate theory, rejecting specious sermonizing in schools, and promoting the scientific method for studying observable phenomena.
Yet it concerns me that the NAS and NSTA are using their copyrights to bring wayward Kansas educators into line.
In the United States, intellectual property, or IP, law ensures that creators and inventors will get paid for their work, while doctrines like fair use and time-limited rights leave enough breathing room for the next innovator to use existing creations to comment, critique or make something new. But we have increasingly seen owners leverage their IP rights to get control rather than to get paid.