Tue Oct 28 11:36:14 UTC 2025: Okay, here’s a summary and a news article rewrite of the provided text:
Summary:
The article, published in The Hindu on October 28, 2025, examines the complex issue of ownership in scholarly publishing from an Indian perspective. It highlights the paradox of publicly funded research in India being locked behind paywalls controlled by commercial publishers. While the Budapest Open Access Declaration aimed to democratize knowledge, the reality is that access remains restricted, often through high Article Processing Charges (APCs). The Indian government’s “One Nation, One Subscription” (ONOS) initiative is discussed as a step toward wider access, but the article questions whether it truly addresses the core issue of intellectual property rights. The piece delves into copyright transfer agreements, where authors relinquish control of their work to publishers, often limiting its dissemination and reuse. It discusses Creative Commons licenses as a way for authors to retain more control. It points out how major publishers are now profiting by selling scholarly content to Big Tech companies for AI training, further exploiting researchers’ work. The article urges authors to take action by self-archiving, negotiating publishing contracts, advocating for institutional rights-retention policies, and using Creative Commons licenses. Ultimately, it argues that authors, not corporations, should own and share knowledge to ensure equitable scholarship.
News Article:
Headline: Indian Researchers Question Who Owns Their Knowledge as Open Access Week Highlights Inequities
Bengaluru, October 28, 2025 – As the world observes International Open Access Week, a new debate is brewing in India about the ownership of research funded by public money. A recent article in The Hindu raises concerns about the dominance of commercial publishers who control access to scientific findings, despite the fact that researchers and peer reviewers contribute their expertise for free.
For decades, researchers have routinely signed copyright transfer agreements, granting publishers exclusive rights to their work. While this has historically been viewed as essential, it has led to a situation where the public effectively pays twice: once to fund the research and again to access the published results through expensive journal subscriptions or increasingly costly article processing charges.
The Indian government’s “One Nation, One Subscription” (ONOS) initiative, launched earlier this year, provides access to journals from major international publishers to researchers at publicly funded institutions. While seen as a positive step, critics argue that it doesn’t fundamentally address the underlying problem of intellectual property rights.
“Should we continue paying large sums to foreign publishers to access knowledge that our own researchers produce, again with public money?” asks Moumita Koley, a senior research analyst at the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, and author of the recent article.
The article highlights how major publishers are now also profiting from selling scholarly content to Big Tech companies for AI training, often without the explicit consent of authors. This practice further monetizes researchers’ intellectual property, prompting a call for change.
The piece encourages Indian researchers to take steps to reclaim control of their work by self-archiving, negotiating publishing contracts to retain rights, and advocating for institutional policies that prioritize open access. The use of Creative Commons licenses is also recommended as a way for authors to share their work more freely.
As Open Access Week 2025 draws attention to inequities in scholarly publishing, the question of who owns knowledge remains a crucial point of discussion. Experts say that the future of equitable scholarship depends on empowering authors to own and share the knowledge that shapes society.
First Piper 