- A musician writes a song, record it, the limelight and then, whenever it is played, will charge a fee for using its intellectual property, explained Elena during Coffee few evenings ago. It has nothing to do with the intellectual property of scientists.
- right? Asked Beatriz .
-No. When a scientist writes an article and decided to send him to a journal for publication and it accepts you miss your copyright, you are transferred to the journal in question.
- But when, as a reader, want a scientific paper you have to pay. Of that money, "the author receives nothing?
- No, nothing. Even in some journals, the author must pay figures of up to three zeros.
The situation is unfair. Both the musician and the scientist want their work recognized. The player receives a share of royalties for the use of its intellectual property, the scientist have given anything to get their rights. Not even a free copy of the magazine which published his manuscript.
- And the musicians complain over Elena "he added.
I have never received money raised by one of my posts, I require is that someday you can serve somebody. But neither had I never compared with a musician. It is true that my items are not in journals of impact factor, but in the case of Elena, who has been through days of laboratory nightly Monday through Saturday, and start to feed the hundreds of zebrafish make up your experiment every Sunday over four years, the situation seems most unfair.
The result is this excellent article in Current Biology on the orientation of cell division in embryonic neural tissue, a thousand times a thousand times more valuable and less known than any song on the radio.
There are things that still seems to remain unchanged: the scientists are still trying to stone, without recognizing they are worth.
Photo: Elena Poliwhirl zebrafish looks through the glass of your aquarium.
0 comments:
Post a Comment