Wissenschaftliche Validität als Qualitätsmerkmal der Zukunftsforschung

Zukunftsforschung beansprucht, wissenschaftlichen Kriterien zu genügen. Anders als in anderen Disziplinen trifft man jedoch in diesem Fachgebiet auf besondere Herausforderungen hinsichtlich der Kriterien wissenschaftlicher Validität und an die Verfahren ihrer Prüfung, da übliche Ansätze wie die empirische Bewährung oder logische Ableitung in der Zukunftsforschung nicht anwendbar sind. Stattdessen können, so die hier vertretene These, strukturelle Überlegungen aus der Kohärenztheorie der Wahrheit übertragen werden, um die wissenschaftliche Qualität von Zukunftsaussagen konzeptuell zu begreifen und mit Kriterien zur Validierung zu operationalisieren. Entscheidend ist, dass Aussagen der Zukunftsforschung transparent in ihre Bestandteile zerlegt werden und dass sowohl für die Bestandteile als auch für die Art und Weise der Zusammenfügung der Bestandteile belastbare Argumente angeführt werden können. Der Beitrag schließt mit Überlegungen, was von einer explizit wissenschaftlichen Validierung von Zukunftsüberlegungen erwartet werden kann und was nicht.

A manifesto for an e-lending limitation in copyright

In the European Union, lending is an exclusive right for copyright and related rights, but Member States can transform public lending to a right of remuneration and even exempt some establishments from any payment. The making available of works online is not covered by the public lending right regime of the Rental and Lending Directive but is considered as an act of making available governed by the InfoSoc Directive. As a consequence, libraries are currently not allowed to digitally transmit works to their patrons as lending, but have entered into licenses with publishers to develop an offer of lending of e-books, also called e-lending, with the intermediation of dedicated platforms operated by commercial actors. Compared to physical lending, e-lending is not based on ownership of the book by libraries but on its provision by this intermediary. This paper discusses how the objective of enabling libraries to engage in e-lending should be achieved, and what is the proper dividing line between a market-based solution, as developing today, and a limitation to exclusive rights. The impact of an extension of the public lending right to e-lending should be assessed, but not based on a criterion of direct substitution of a book on loan at the library to a book bought at a retailer. By definition, libraries are substitutes to normal trade. Instead, the overall effect of lending to the commercialisation of books and other works should be verified. Particular conditions for a limitation in favour of lending are also addressed, and notably the modalities of lending (a limited duration, one simultaneous user per title, …), not to make e-lending through libraries easier and preferable to the normal acquisition of an e-book. This paper argues in favour of some and controlled extension of the public lending right to cover the lending of e-books and other digital content. For the role of libraries is essential in providing access to works and culture to readers who would or could not rely only on normal acquisition of books or other items on the market, to works that are not provided by the market, and to material for research. Libraries are a third sector providing access to works, aside the market and non-market exchanges between individuals. This role should not lose its relevance in the digital context, or it would culturally impoverish future generations of readers.