Copyright and research: an archivangelist's perspective

Conflation of academic copyright issues with respect to books (whether text books, research monographs or popularisations) and research articles, is rife in the academic publishing industry. A charitable interpretation is that this is because to publishers they are all effectively the same: a product produced for commercial benefit. An uncharitable interpretation is that this is a classic Fear Uncertainty and Doubt approach, in an attempt to delay the inevitable move to Open Access (OA) to research articles. To authors, however, research articles and books are generally very different things. Research articles are produced without the expectation of direct financial return, whereas books generally include some consideration of financial return. Taylor’s “Copyright and research: an academic publisher’s perspective” (SCRIPT-ed 4:2) falls wholesale into this mental trap and in particular his lauding of the position paper of the Association of American Professional and Scholarly Publishers, shows a lack of understanding of the continuing huge loss to scholarship of a lack of OA to research articles. It should be regarded as a categorical imperative for scholars to embrace OA to research articles.

Discerning policy and drivers for sustainable facilities management practice

Due to the changing nature of the facilities management (FM) profession, facilities managers are increasingly engaged with the evolving sustainability agenda in the UK and the development or uptake of sustainability policies within their organisations. This study investigates how facilities managers are engaging with the sustainability agenda and the drivers, policy issues and information they use to improve their sustainability performance management. A web based self-administered questionnaire survey of facilities managers in the UK was conducted to identify drivers and issues that influence and support good sustainable practices. A total of 268 facilities managers responded. The results indicate that legislation is the most important driver for the implementation of sustainable practices. Corporate image and Organisational ethos are also recognised. However demand for efficient monitoring, management and reporting on environmental impact is not highly rated even though the top three issues of sustainability managed by facilities managers are energy management, waste and recycling management and carbon footprint. In addition, facilities managers are expected to take ownership of activities assigned to the reduction of carbon emission. Government industries and organisation with high turnover are more likely to have a sustainability policy. Financial constraints are the main barriers while legislations are the main driver for implementing sustainability. For non-profit organisations and the charitable sector, financial constraints are no hindrance to implementing a sustainability policy. The conclusion drawn is that sustainability agendas continue to be influenced by regulated environmental issues rather than a balanced approach which takes into consideration the wider social and economic aspects of sustainability. While this scenario is far from ideal, the expectation is that the organisation will trust FM to take a vital role in delivering a comprehensive sustainability policy due to the rising tide of legislation, public scrutiny, as well as the needed business case for genuinely embracing sustainability. However, as the integration of sustainability with core business strategies is continuously evolving the emphasis on different drivers will vary from organisation to organisation as well as the responsibilities of facilities managers.

Massive Open Online Courses and sustainability

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have become very popular among learners millions of users from around the world registered with leading platforms. There are hundreds of universities (and other organizations) offering MOOCs. However, sustainability of MOOCs is a pressing concern as MOOCs incur up front creation costs, maintenance costs to keep content relevant and on-going support costs to provide facilitation while a course is being run. At present, charging a fee for certification (for example Coursera Signature Track and FutureLearn Statement of Completion) seems a popular business model. In this paper, the authors discuss other possible business models and their pros and cons. Some business models discussed here are: Freemium model – providing content freely but charging for premium services such as course support, tutoring and proctored exams. Sponsorships – courses can be created in collaboration with industry where industry sponsorships are used to cover the costs of course production and offering. For example Teaching Computing course was offered by the University of East Anglia on the FutureLearn platform with the sponsorship from British Telecom while the UK Government sponsored the course Introduction to Cyber Security offered by the Open University on FutureLearn. Initiatives and Grants – The government, EU commission or corporations could commission the creation of courses through grants and initiatives according to the skills gap identified for the economy. For example, the UK Government’s National Cyber Security Programme has supported a course on Cyber Security. Similar initiatives could also provide funding to support relevant course development and offering. Donations – Free software, Wikipedia and early OER initiatives such as the MIT OpenCourseware accept donations from the public and this could well be used as a business model where learners could contribute (if they wish) to the maintenance and facilitation of a course. Merchandise – selling merchandise could also bring revenue to MOOCs. As many participants do not seek formal recognition (European Commission, 2014) for their completion of a MOOC, merchandise that presents their achievement in a playful way could well be attractive for them. Sale of supplementary material –supplementary course material in the form of an online or physical book or similar could be sold with the revenue being reinvested in the course delivery. Selective advertising – courses could have advertisements relevant to learners Data sharing – though a controversial topic, sharing learner data with relevant employers or similar could be another revenue model for MOOCs. Follow on events – the courses could lead to follow on summer schools, courses or other real-life or online events that are paid-for in which case a percentage of the revenue could be passed on to the MOOC for its upkeep. Though these models are all possible ways of generating revenue for MOOCs, some are more controversial and sensitive than others. Nevertheless unless appropriate business models are identified the sustainability of MOOCs would be problematic.

The Léger ruling as another example of the ECJ’s disappointingly reticent approach to the protection of the rights of LGB persons under EU law

In the 1980s, in the midst of the AIDS epidemic, many countries introduced lifetime bans on blood donations by men who had sexual relations with men (MSM). These blanket bans have, recently, begun to be challenged and, as a result, many countries have either relaxed them or completely abolished them. The case under examination (Léger ) is another instance of questioning the legality of such a ban. In particular, in this case, the European Court of Justice was called on to rule on whether a measure such as the French lifetime exclusion from blood donation of the MSM population that was at issue before the referring court is contrary to EU law. The Court ruled that although discriminatory on the ground of sexual orientation, such a ban may be justified in certain circumstances, and left it to the national court to make the final decision. This article seeks to analyse the case and to explain why, in the author’s view, the Court can be accused of—once more—not going far enough in the protection of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) rights.