全部翻譯完成版本，翻譯的確是很困難的一件事。
Open Access from the Point of View of the Coalition for Action
‘Copyright for Education and Research’
By Rainer Kuhlen, Chair of Information Science, University of Konstanz; Spokesman for the Coalition for Action ‘Copyright
for Education and Research’ (Aktionsbundnis ‘Urheberrecht fur Bildung und Wissenschaft’)
從開放近用的角度來看‘教育和研究的版權’聯盟的行動
The Coalition for Action ‘Copyright for Education and Research’ (Aktionsbundnis ‘Urheberrecht fur Bildung und Wissenschaft’, ABU) was formed in the context of the current debate surrounding the reform of German copyright law. It aims to represent the interests of education and science and scholarship in a liberal treatment of knowledge and information dissemination vis a vis the legislator. The basis of the ABU is the Gottingen Declaration of 2004, signed by 6 academic organisations, 328 learned societies and 5 500 individuals(as of April 2007). Its central message is as follows: ‘In a digitised and networked information society, access to global information for the purposes of education and science must be guaranteed at all times from any place!’ This is certainly compatible with the goals of Open Access.
為計畫'版權的教育和研究' （Aktionsbundnis ‘Urheberrecht fur Bildung und Wissenschaft’，新華社）聯盟的行動形成關於目前圍繞著改善德國版權法的辯論。它的目標是代表教育、科學和學問的利益對於議員散佈自由知識和資訊的處置。新華社最初是以2004年的哥廷根宣言簽署了6學術團體， 328名學術團體和5500個個人（截至2007年4月） 。其主要消息如下： '在一個數位和網路訊息的社會，為了教育和科學目的，全球的資訊必須保證在何時何地都可以近用！ '這無疑是符合開放近用的目標。
The ABU can only indirectly promote the implementation of the principle of Open Access in education and science. Generally, Open Access is not impaired by copyright. Copyright grants authors publishing rights. An Open Access publication, however, means that the author’s exploitation rights are no longer exclusive. However, it is the authors’ decision whether to also make their work available for commercial exploitation through contractual agreements.
ABU只能在原則下間接地促進開放近用在教育和科學上的落實。一般來說，開放近用不會受版權的損害。版權授予作者出版的權利。一份開放近用的出版物，無論如何，這意味著作者宣傳權利不再是專有性的。然而，是否讓他們的工作透過契約上的協定可利用商業宣傳，是作者的決定。
In any case, the author’s personal/moral rights are not affected by Open Access. Some of the problems in the overlapping areas of Open Access and copyright are as follows:
無論如何，作者在私人/道德上的權利都沒有被開放近用影響，一些關於開放近用與版權在重疊區域上的問題如下：
It would be easier for many authors to start applying Open Access if Section 38 of the German Copyright Law was changed so that authors of contributions to periodically published collections could have their exploitation rights (for non-commercial purposes) restored after a maximum period of six months from the date of the commercial publication of their work and so that one could not even waive this right contractually. The time delay may not be in the spirit of Open Access, but this regulation could inspire many authors to make their work freely available after an embargo period of this type.
如果德國版權法令第38條的改變對很多作者開始上傳開放近用來說會變的簡單些，作者在定期出版作品的貢獻可以使作者的宣傳權(非商業目的)從他們的商業出版品工作和沒辦法合約上的放棄權力的那天開始，最多六個月的期間內之後恢復。
時間延遲並不是開放近用的精神，但是此項管制可以激勵許多作者讓他們的工作在一段這類型禁用的期間之後免費被使用。
A difficult question is whether, in addition to being encouraged to make their work available for Open Access publication, authors should also be obliged to deposit, in parallel at least, any work in paralleling from research supported by public funds in the Open Access repositories of their institutions. This is currently a controversial issue, since, for some, not only the questions of ‘whether’, ‘when’ and ‘how’ constitute academic freedom, but also the question of ‘where’. For others, the question of ‘where’ should not be left exclusively to the free choice of the individual. The ABU tends to support the latter opinion, so that, in line with the goal of the Gottingen Declaration, all of the knowledge produced with the help of public funds can be made publicly available. Of course authors should continue to be allowed to choose freely where they publish their work commercially, so long as the Open Access publication is guaranteed without delay.
有一個困難的問題是，除了被鼓勵讓他們的工作可適用在開放進用出版品之外，作者應該也要被強制保存，最少相等平行，藉由他們的體系裡開放近用寶庫中公眾資金支持的研究，任何的工作都是對等的。這是目前一個有爭議的議題，因為對一些人來說，不只是”是否”，”何時”和”如何”組成的學術自由，也是”何處”的問題。對其他人來說，”何處”的問題在個人的自由選擇中應該不能被獨立。ABU偏向去支持後者的意見，結果，符合哥廷根宣言的目標，藉由可公開提供的公眾基金的幫助 ，全部的知識被產生。當然作者應該繼續被允許選擇出版他們的作品是否商業化的自由，只要開放進用出版
A considerable part of the knowledge that should be openly accessible is contained in so-called ‘orphaned’ works. On the basis of their publication dates, these works are still protected by copyright, but their authors can only be located with great difficulty or not at all. Due to this uncertain legal situation libraries often do not dare to digitalise these culturally important items, whatever their media form, and make them freely accessible to the public. So far, legislators have not solved the problem of orphaned works. The ABU has been active in this area with suggestions, and has in principle joined the German Research Foundation’s (DFG) demand on the EU to solve this situation by considering and treating these works as if they were in the public domain until a rights holder objects. From the point of view of the DFG and the Coalition for Action, it is imperative for the freedom of research and education that the digitalisation of orphaned works or works in the public domain does not justify the creation of new copyrights or exploitation rights of the digitalised original. A similarly liberal solution should be found for works that are no longer in print.
一部分可觀的應該被開放的近用知識包含在稱為孤兒的工作中；根據它們的出版日期，這些工作仍然被版權保護，但是他們的作者只能被定位在很大的困難或是絲毫沒有困難；由於這些不確定的合法狀況圖書館員常常不願意去數位化這些有文化性的作品，無論它們的媒體形式如何，以及讓它們被自由的公開近用。到目前為止，立法委員沒有解決孤兒工作的問題。ABU已經被建議在這個領域活躍起來，以及已經在原則上加入德國研究基金會(DFG)根據歐盟的要求來解決這些情況藉由 以及從DFG的觀點和，對研究和教育的自由來說是迫切需要的，在公眾區域工作或是孤兒工作的數位化沒辦法證實新版權的創作品或是原始數位化的廣告權。一個類似應該在工作上發明的自由處理型態不再只是影印。
The ABU sees Open Access as well as free licensing forms such as ‘creative commons’ that support authors’ information autonomy as promising solutions to the regulatory impasses of current copyright law without fundamentally questioning it.
ABU視開放進用和自由許可形式是一樣的像是”創作上的共識”，這共識支持作者的資訊自主像是對沒有基礎上質疑目前版權法規定的絕境。
