Re: Self-Archiving and the reaction of publishers

From: Thomas Bacher <bacher_at_PURDUE.EDU>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 10:54:25 -0500

Actually, copyright exists in the same force for items not published as for
items published. The only difference really exists in the sense that sales
can be hurt for commercially published materials. However, if someone
violates your copyright by publishing a work that you had written, since you
own the copyright for this without having it registered or not, you have all
legal avenues available to redress your grievance.

Publishing is another matter. That is, we are beginning a new e-only line of
scholarly books (see These books will be available
digitally, will have ISBNs, will be published under our imprint, and will be
available for distribution. I imagine that this is publication? No?

Thomas Bacher, Director, Purdue Press
1207 SCC-E, W. Lafayette, IN 47907-1207
(765)494-2038 Fax: (765)496-2442

Be at your life-long-learning best. Read from a University Press.

-----Original Message-----
From: September 1998 American Scientist Forum
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: Self-Archiving and the reaction of publishers

For the avoidance of any doubt (I hope!), let me make it clear. Writing
something down on one piece of paper is not publishing it, in any
sense. Stevan Harnad seems to be implying that because there is
copyright in a statement, that means it is published. Not so. The
concept of copyright can exist entirely independently of whether
something is published and does so exist in many, many millions of
instances. The extent and limits of copyright are different for
something that is published, compared with the extent and limits of
copyright for something that isn't.

Bernard Naylor
Received on Mon Jan 24 2000 - 19:17:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:45:57 GMT