Re: Fair-Use/Schmair-Use...

From: Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 02:22:02 +0100 (BST)

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Sandy Thatcher wrote:

> I actually agree, too, that the practice of an author sharing a paper with
> another researcher who requests it, one request at a time, should be
> considered as fair use-and should be allowed by all publishers anyway. But
> Stevan doesn't tell us what limits, if any, he puts on authors'
> distributing their articles once a contract has been signed and rights
> transferred. Does he, for instance, condone responding to a request to
> have the article posted on a listserv to 1,000 people subscribed to that
> listserv?

No, we're talking about one-on-one, individual sending of individual
eprints on individual request, for research use.

> Does he think it is ok for an author to sell an article for use in a
> course pack for a large course in a non-profit university, or in a
> for-profit university (like Phoenix)?

Absolutely not. We are talking about authors giving (not selling) individual
copies of their own postprints, for research use.

> Publishers would rightly object to the latter, but theoretically Stevan's
> "Fair Use Button" could be used to respond to such a request.

Someone could design a "sales button," but we certainly haven't. The
EPrints Fair Use Button simply emails a free copy if the author agrees
to the request. (This is about OA, remember?)

> And if Stevan doesn't think the latter is fair use, then isn't that a
> request for permission that he would then deny through his device?

It's not a request for permission; it's a request for a copy (and an
offer to provide it). No one spoke about selling eprints. If someone
wanted to teach a course with my eprint, I'd send the requester a copy.
I'd send it to individual students requesting it too. Putting it in a
course pack on the other end is not my business, and is between the one
who is trying to make that use of it, and the publisher. What I called
(and continue to call) Fair Use is my sending it to the requester, and
the requester receiving, downloading, storing and reading it for
his own individual use. I have no views on the other uses except to say
that this is all just interim nonsense, and that this coy, absurd "Fair
Use" interregnum -- in which 38% of postprints are ceremoniously deposited
as Closed Access instead of Open Access because of an embargo, and are
distributed instead via the Fair Use Button -- will soon pass, and 100%
of deposits will be immediately deposed as Open Access, as they should
have been all along. It is merely a sop, for those who can't bring
themselves to mandate immediate OA for all research output.

> Stevan then would, in effect, be doing what any publisher does, viz.,
> responding to individual requests and making judgments about what to allow
> for free and what to charge for or deny.

I, and the millions of other authors who have responded to reprint and
eprint requests by mail and email for over 5 decades would be making
judgments about whom to send eprints to and whom not. That's all.

Cheers, Stevan
Received on Thu Aug 23 2007 - 02:22:15 BST