Re: Copyright: Form, Content, and Prepublication Incarnations

From: Albert Henderson <>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 20:35:40 +0000

on 15 Nov 2001 Stevan Harnad <> wrote:

>sh> 6.5. If 6.3 is unsuccessful, archive the"corrigenda"
>sh> Your pre-refereeing preprint has already been self-archived
>sh> since prior to submission, and is not covered by the copyright
>sh> agreement, which pertains to the revised final ("value-added")
>sh> draft. Hence all you need to do is to self-archive a further file,
>sh> linked to the archived preprint, which simply lists the
>sh> corrections that the reader may wish to make in order to conform
>sh> the preprint to the refereed, accepted version.
>sh> 6. How to get around restrictive copyright legally
> >
>AH> the [above] passage [is] misleading:
>AH> [if it] were true, the standard language of copyright agreements
>AH> would refer to all prior versions of the work.
> >
>AH> If the work covered by the copyright agreement is substantially the same,
>AH> using the same language, title, references, etc., then the earlier version
>AH> is also covered. The exception would be passages deleted from the earlier
>AH> version.
>sh> Albert Henderson unfortunately continues to misunderstand the point
>sh> here, and I think I know why. He continues to think in completely
>sh> unreconstructed Gutenberg-era terms, as if the Internet and the
>sh> digital revolution had never happened, and we were simply speaking
>sh> about straightforward cases of present and past print-on-paper
>sh> publication.
>sh> The case he always has in mind is an author, asked to transfer
>sh> copyright, while another publisher, a prior one, continues to
>sh> print and publish and sell the text in question.
>sh> In such a case, the copyright holder can go after the other publisher,
>sh> to get him to stop printing or selling the text.
>sh> But that is not at all the case here! There is no other publisher.
>sh> The AUTHOR HIMSELF has publicly archived HIS OWN TEXT on-line

Steven is so dazzled by technology he believes that there are special
exceptions in what he calls the 'post-Gutenberg era.' There is nothing
special, in terms of copyright, in posting a work to an Internet
server. The author may be obligated by a copyright transfer to delete
what he has "archived" (an inappropriate term for unreviewed drafts)
and to defend the copyright that protects authorship from piracy and
plagiarism. I would consider any continuing distribution of
unauthorized copies should be considered piratical and subject to
whatever prosecution and penalties may exist in law.

Albert Henderson
Received on Thu Nov 15 2001 - 20:36:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:46:17 GMT