Professors should opt for legally downloadable textbooks where possible, as they help students on a tight budget and offer greater flexibility.
The Taipei-based Chinese Oral and Literary Copyright Intermediary Association (中華語文著作權仲介協會) has reportedly signed a contract with the Tainan Reprographics Guild (台南市影印商業同業公會) to allow foreign-language books to be photocopied as long as an authorization fee is paid and the number of pages copied does not exceed 20 percent of the book.
Every summer, the Taiwan Book Publishers Association (台灣國際圖書業交流協會), composed of 30 publishers, issues an official letter to presidents of domestic colleges and universities and sends copies to the Ministry of Education and the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) calling for the use of copyrighted textbooks. In turn, the office issues a letter requesting that the Ministry of Economic Affairs demand colleges and universities instruct students to use copyrighted books.
Preposterously, college and university presidents forward this letter from a commercial pressure group to every teacher and the IPO threatens students to make them comply.
Students have no choice but to give in to the pressure.
On April 11, 2001, prosecutors and police raided a dormitory at National Cheng Kung University, seizing 14 computers and accusing students of illegally downloading and trading MP3 music files. A few days later, the education ministry mediated and students expressed regret for their wrongdoing.
But illicit downloading continued.
In the fall of 2003, two US students at Swarthmore College posted on the school’s network internal memorandums from Diebold as reference for a discussion on electronic voting machines. The college removed the documents from the Web site upon receiving a cease-and-desist order from Diebold, a manufacturer of online voting machines.
But Harvard University undergraduate Derek Slater re-posted the memos on his university’s Web site in support of the right to post the documents. Harvard soon received a cease-and-desist order from the company and pulled the memos. A few days later, a Harvard University legal counselor said such the posting had been fair use. Diebold made concessions, allowing the memos to be reposted to the Web site.
Two Swarthmore students and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit accusing Diebold of abusing copyright protection regulations. In 2004, the students formed a club, joining forces with more than 30 colleges to promote free culture, including the right to download and photocopy textbooks.
R. Preston McAfee, an economics professor at the California Institute of Technology, could not accept the high cost of textbooks. He began refusing to recommend books costing more than US$200 and put an economics textbook he had authored online as a free download, both in PDF and editable formats.
McAfee said his book would have had a list price approaching US$200 if he had gone the traditional publishing route. Following his promotion of open textbooks, academics have donated enough textbooks for use at university economics departments, which no longer have to accept unreasonable prices or threats.
The education ministry and the IPO should ignore letters from publishers and promote open textbooks for university courses. Better still, they could pay professors to compile and publish free textbooks. This is the best way to eradicate illegal copying.
Mao Ching-chen is an associate professor in the Department of Library and Information Science at Fu Jen Catholic University.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS