Human Terrain & Anthropology (merged thread)

[selil]

There are some questions about this I've not formulated really good ideas about. I'll pose them as questions because to me that is really what they are....

1) The national academies of science have stated on several occasions that copyrights and government funded research are in direct contrast to each other. Is it possible that anybody publishing in a copyright journal whether funded by NSF, state university pay check, or just private institution receiving federal education dollars are involved in unethical or immoral conduct of dissemination?

2) In contrast to MPAA/RIAA/ and issues with intellectual property ownership of the Mouse (Disney) academic plagiarism is about claim of credit and not necessarily profit and as such is protected by fair use and relaxed constraints on use. Is it possible that the scope of plagiarism has been expanded inappropriately by the commercial copyright issues?

3) In the United States federal use of copyright material has always been protected through a variety of mechanisms from library exemption to evidence exemption to sunshine laws in the production and dissemination of materials. Is it possible that copyright simply does not apply to the federal government as a creating and publishing entity?

4) The government could simply stamp FOUO the FM and it would no longer be an issue but they haven't. Is academic political punditry creating a situation where refusal of open disclosure will be the result and access to materials will be restricted?

5) In the social sciences the ideas are the science. Without evidence (no published work) of the ideas of scholars involved in the Human Terrain project their science is questioned (and threatened with censorship). Is the idealogical position (statement of principles) of the discipline of anthropology simply at odds with dissemination and evaluation of good science?

I guess is this just simply another example of academia and the military taking different roads and how long will it be before the military has their own complete education system? Ooops already happened.

[SteveMetz]

There are some questions about this I've not formulated really good ideas about. I'll pose them as questions because to me that is really what they are....

1) The national academies of science have stated on several occasions that copyrights and government funded research are in direct contrast to each other. Is it possible that anybody publishing in a copyright journal whether funded by NSF, state university pay check, or just private institution receiving federal education dollars are involved in unethical or immoral conduct of dissemination?

I guess this kind of tangentially addresses your point, but anything I write at the office becomes the property of the People and cannot be copyrighted. So when I get the copyright release form for a journal article, I have to indicate that I do not own the copyright and therefore cannot assign it.

Here's the kicker--right now I'm on sabbatical working out of my home office. Much of the material I'm using was collected at government expense. Yet this manuscript can be copyrighted.

This has actually been a big issue for us: we're an accredited, degree granting institution of higher education, yet our faculty cannot sit in their office and write books because no publisher is going to produce a book they can't hold copyright on. We're trying to get the legislation changed on this.

Interesting tidbit on this--because Harry Summers' book On Strategy was written while he was at the Strategic Studies Institute, it is not copyrighted. Only the preface, which he wrote at home, is.

[marct]

Hi Sam,

These are really good questions.

[quote=selil;30069]There are some questions about this I've not formulated really good ideas about. I'll pose them as questions because to me that is really what they are....

1) The national academies of science have stated on several occasions that copyrights and government funded research are in direct contrast to each other. Is it possible that anybody publishing in a copyright journal whether funded by NSF, state university pay check, or just private institution receiving federal education dollars are involved in unethical or immoral conduct of dissemination?

I would have to say yes, but only if they accepted the NAS moral code you conditional that you mention. I have noticed a curious disconnect amongst many people between their stated ideals and their "unofficial" views.

Is it possible that the scope of plagiarism has been expanded inappropriately by the commercial copyright issues?

Probably, but I would also argue that copyright has been expanded well beyond its original purpose.

3) In the United States federal use of copyright material has always been protected through a variety of mechanisms from library exemption to evidence exemption to sunshine laws in the production and dissemination of materials. Is it possible that copyright simply does not apply to the federal government as a creating and publishing entity?

No comment. In Canada, the Crown retains copyright (not the Government).

4) The government could simply stamp FOUO the FM and it would no longer be an issue but they haven't. Is academic political punditry creating a situation where refusal of open disclosure will be the result and access to materials will be restricted?

Possible, but I wouldn't call it too likely given the propensity of things to leak. I think a far more likely outcome of academic punditry is a growing wedge between polarized sides and the increasing marginalization of certain disciplines.

5) In the social sciences the ideas are the science. Without evidence (no published work) of the ideas of scholars involved in the Human Terrain project their science is questioned (and threatened with censorship). Is the idealogical position (statement of principles) of the discipline of anthropology simply at odds with dissemination and evaluation of good science?

No. There is a long tradition in Anthropology of taking a fairly long time to do fieldwork and long delays in publication. The HTTs haven't been around long enough for this to be a problem.

I guess is this just simply another example of academia and the military taking different roads and how long will it be before the military has their own complete education system? Ooops already happened.

LOLOL

[jcustis]

Was it senior NCOs, junior officers who had to go out and do counterinsurgency, or was it the PME system, strategic planners, and senior leaders? Ultimately, the authors tried to address both audiences. And, like any compromise, it ended up not fully satisfying either.

I think the 3-24 is built for the battalion TF and above. It's companion, the MCIP 3-33.01 is definitely built for the small unit leader, coy-level and below. The MCIP is, however, relevant reading for every staff member at the battalion level and above, so they can grasp what the subordinate maneuver elements will be wrestling with.

[marct]

Refuting Colonel John Nagl
Army's Prime Salesman of Counterinsurgency Manual Seeks to Defend Stolen Scholarship

By DAVID PRICE
Counterpunch, Nov 3/4, 2007

I will note that there is at least one quote included in DP's article that, while attributed, lists no source, id est

By this I mean people like the recently retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez who know that the Iraq war is now "a nightmare with no end in sight".

[SteveMetz]

I will note that there is at least one quote included in DP's article that, while attributed, lists no source, id est

Well, my theory is that Dr. Price has stumbled on a way to get the attention that his normal work doesn't bring. My recommendation to him is that instead of writing silly essays, he follow the lead of Chris Crocker and do a YouTube video called, "Leave Anthropology Alone!!"

[selil]

Anybody else notice that Counterpunch is in the middle of a fundraising drive, and Dr. Price's book is listed on each of his posts?

[marct]

Anybody else notice that Counterpunch is in the middle of a fundraising drive, and Dr. Price's book is listed on each of his posts?

Yup. Need more be said on that ?

On a different note, and back to an earlier question, does anyone know if eminent domain applies to copyright?

[Ken White]

than that I thought J. Wolfsberger and thus by extension Steve Metz, Selil and a couple of others had a valid point; an FM is not an academic work regardless of who outside DoD elects to publish it for whatever reason and some of the modficiation suggested to dress the sow's ear seem rather pointless.

However, with this from Marc:

"I will note that there is at least one quote included in DP's article that, while attributed, lists no source, id est"

By this I mean people like the recently retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez who know that the Iraq war is now "a nightmare with no end in sight".

I'm moved to comment that Professor Price is building significant credibility problems in my mind. Not from the lack of a source for the quote, rather from his choice of quote and its originator...