On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Peter Suber <peters_at_earlham.edu> wrote:
>
> The difficulty of total deletion has one more benefit for FOS. If you put
> an unrefereed preprint of your work on the web, well before the moment when
> you might assign the copyright to a journal, and then later publish a
> revised or unrevised version in a journal, the journal may ask you to
> remove the preprint from the web. You needn't comply; but even if you try
> to do so, the preprint will almost certainly survive in some freely
> accessible form. A recent thread of the September98 forum discussed the
> effect of this phenomenon on copyright negotiations.
>
> Thread name, "Copyright: Form, Content, and Prepublication Incarnations"
> http://makeashorterlink.com/?R5D84203
> (The topic is more explicit later in the thread than earlier.)
This news bit overlooks one important point and that point is not
to underestimate the monopolistic power in the copyright. There is
no sign that the power will contract. Instead, it is expanding
and I won't be surprised that the copyright holders in future will
force, with the threat of lawsuit, the people and entities to remove
the preprints from their storage.
> Copyright (c) 2001, Peter Suber
> http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/copyrite.htm
Mr. Suber, why do you need copyright in your newsletter? Why don't
you liberate it by putting it in the public domain? What are you
really accomplishing with copyright in your newsletter?
Joseph Pietro Riolo
<riolo_at_voicenet.com>
Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this
post in the public domain.
Received on Thu Dec 06 2001 - 17:57:39 GMT