Now they want to define &quot;meta-research&quot; as stealing, too. I can&#x27;t imagine how would someone buy that.<p>Knowledge is something you cannot capture, that&#x27;s why they have to try to &quot;protect&quot; the symbols. And they can go this far with that deed.<p>Why activists can read and handle degrading words from rich publishers (theft, stealing..), but ignorants cannot read the argument of activists? This is far too confusing to me.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;philosophy&#x2F;words-to-avoid.en.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;philosophy&#x2F;words-to-avoid.en.html</a><p>(I think publishers are feeling threatened as the free culture grows)<p>edit: the speaker explains copyright maths (a special kind of maths used by media lobby experts), very enjoyable :D<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.ted.com&#x2F;the-numbers-behind-the-copyright-math&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.ted.com&#x2F;the-numbers-behind-the-copyright-math&#x2F;</a>