If the author's employment contract states that their employer (the
University) reserves non-commercial distribution rights then that author can
not sign away those rights to a publisher (without the agreement of the
University).
In my opinion I would rather the IPR were held by the institution - who paid
for the research, facilities & support - rather than with the publisher. If
not for any other reason than an institution will rarely hold the same kind
of monopoly as the big publishers.
All the best,
Tim.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fytton Rowland" <J.F.Rowland_at_LBORO.AC.UK>
To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: Draft Policy for Self-Archiving University Research Output
> Um - before you can have a "postprint" you must have published the paper
> somewhere. In many (most?) cases you will have transferred the copyright
to
> the journal. So how can the University then assert its ownership of a
> copyright that you, the individual academic, have already given away in
the
> belief that it was yours to give?
>
> Fytton Rowland.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Picciotto, Sol" <s.picciotto_at_LANCASTER.AC.UK>
> To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 1:57 PM
> Subject: Re: Draft Policy for Self-Archiving University Research Output
>
>
> > It seems that copyright ownership could be an important obstacle to
> archiving
> > postprints. I have proposed at Lancaster that academic staff employment
> > contracts be modified to make it clear that the university asserts its
> rights
> > as employer to copyright in staff research publications, but only to the
> extent
> > of reserving the right to authorise non-commercial publication on the
> internet,
> > e.g. in an eprints archive. This would circumvent a possible restriction
> > resulting from any copyright assignment the author signs. The idea has
> been met
> > favourably here, both by the AUT (professional association) and
> management, but
> > both have referred it for discussion at national level.
> >
> > I think the university should be willing to forego any claim to income
> from
> > research publications, but should retain the right to authorise
> non-commercial
> > publication. The decision on when to publish, which version, etc, should
> be
> > left to the author(s), within a policy such as that suggested here for
> > Southampton, which would greatly facilitate acceptance of eprints
> archiving as
> > a standard practice.
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Sol
> > ********************************
> >
> > Prof. Sol Picciotto
> > Head,
> > Lancaster University Law School
> > Lancaster University
> > LANCASTER LA1 4YN,
> > U.K.
> > direct phone (44)(0)1524-592464
> > fax (44)(0)1524-525212
> > s.picciotto_at_lancaster.ac.uk
> >
> > **********************************
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Stevan Harnad [SMTP:harnad_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 12:49 PM
> > > To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
> > > Subject: Draft Policy for Self-Archiving University Research
> Output
> > >
> > > Comments are invited on the following draft for a university policy on
> > > the self-archiving of research output:
> > >
> > > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lac/archpol.html
> > >
> > > It is being formulated both for use at Southampton
> > > University, and as a possible model for wider adoption,
> > > particularly in connection with a recommended restructuring
> > > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2373.html
> > > of UK's Research Assessment Exercise (RAE)
> > > http://www.rareview.ac.uk/
> > > and its emulation in other countries
> > > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2356.html
> > >
> > > Stevan Harnad
> >
> >
Received on Wed Jan 08 2003 - 16:19:09 GMT