On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 7:19 AM,
C.Oppenheim_at_lboro.ac.uk<C.Oppenheim_at_lboro.ac.uk> wrote:
> CO: The query referred to cases where the author has ASSIGNED copyright to
> Sage. Sage then owns the copyright and is perfectly entitled to say what
> can be done with the article. Crucially, if something is not mentioned as
> permitted, it is forbidden. So if you have assigned copyright to Sage, you
> cannot do anything other than those things listed as permitted by Sage.
Charles, I am second to no one in my admiration and respect for your
mastery of copyright law. And yet all I can say by way of response to
your perfectly valid point is what I wrote:
>> SH: "there is nothing either
>> defensible or enforceable that a publisher can do or say to prevent a
>> researcher from personally distributing individual copies of his own
>> research findings to individual researchers, for research purposes, in any
>> form he wishes, analog or digital, at any time. That is what researchers
>> have been doing for many decades, whether or not their right to do so was
>> formally enshrined in a publisher's "author-re-use" document.
I am referring here very specifically to a researcher personally
mailing an individual analog copy (or emailing an individual digital
copy) of his own published work to another researcher for personal
research purposes, whether or not that has been explicitly mentioned
as permitted in his copyright assignment agreements.
(I am not referring here to making the postprint immediately Open
Access when the publisher is not Green [i.e., does not endorse
immediate Open Access, and instead requests an embargo on providing
Open Access]; I am referring to efficient new ways of using the older
practice of sending individual reprints on individual request in order
to tide over research needs during the publisher's embargo period:
http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/274-guid.html )
> CO: There is an incredibly easy way round this problem! Sage don't REQUIRE
> authors to assign copyright. The author should ask Sage for its
> standard Licence to Publish form, sign that, and then the author can do what
> he/she likes with the materials. Sage willingly and without quibble (unlike
> some publishers) do this for you.
For SAGE authors in particular, and for providing immediate OA, that
is excellent advice and a splendid, sensible option.
But my point was about what authors can and should do with less sage
publishers...
> CO: Incidentally, Stevan's point (3) is valid, and is an alternative to using
> the Licence to Publish method.
My point (3) was:
>> SH: (3) And in saying things that you can and cannot do with your own work,
>> the SAGE "author-re-use" document is not restricting itself to the things a
>> publisher can and cannot tell you that you can and cannot do with your own
>> work. For example, publisher "permissions" regarding what you can and cannot
>> do with your pre-submission preprint prior to acceptance of the refereed
>> postprint are rather far-fetched (e.g., making corrections in it).
I think you are here thinking of our old Oppenheim/Harnad "preprint &
corrigenda" strategy of tiding over a publisher's OA embargo: Make the
unrefereed preprint OA before submitting to the journal, and if upon
acceptance the journal seeks to embargo OA to the refereed postprint,
instead update the OA preprint with a corrigenda file.
http://bit.ly/vi3JQ
That strategy is still viable, but it has now been superseded by the
option of "Immediate Closed Access Deposit & the "Email Eprint
Request" Button, which allows would-be users to request -- and authors
to fulfill -- eprint requests much more quickly and efficiently than
by searching for the author's address, mailing a reprint request card,
and then mailing a reprint, as in paper days. The Button automatically
emails the author with the user's eprint request, and the author need
merely click on a URL in the email request to send a single eprint to
the requester.
http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/274-guid.html
The "CA Deposit & Button" option is especially useful for researchers
who prefer not to make their unrefereed preprints public.
Stevan Harnad
> ________________________________
> From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
> [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On
> Behalf Of Stevan Harnad
> Sent: 27 July 2009 12:02
> To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
> Subject: "Authors Re-using Their Own Work"
>
>
> On 27-Jul-09, at 5:39 AM, [identity deleted] wrote:
>
> Hello Stevan,
>
> Could I ask you to have a quick look at SAGE's terms for "Authors Re-using
> Their Own Work"? It seems to me that it forbids the "email eprint request"
> button:
>
> http://www.sagepub.com/repository/binaries/journals/permissions/author_use.doc
>
> (The link is from this page: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
> )
>
> It says you can distribute photocopies of the published article to your
> colleagues on an individual basis, but not electronic versions. On my
> reading, there's a 12-month embargo on circulating electronic copies of the
> refereed version of the article in any way. Wouldn't this prohibit the
> "email eprint request"
> button? http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/274-guid.html
>
> (1) The SAGE "author-re-use"
> document says "You can distribute photocopies." It does not say "You cannot distribute electronic versions." It simply does
> not say "You can distribute electronic versions."
> (2) There are many other things the SAGE "author-re-use" document does not
> say you can do with your own work, including that you can distribute
> corrected versions, laminated versions, or versions in Gothic script.
> (3) And in saying things that you can and cannot do with your own work, the
> SAGE "author-re-use" document is not restricting itself to the things a
> publisher can and cannot tell you that you can and cannot do with your own
> work. For example, publisher "permissions" regarding what you can and cannot
> do with your pre-submission preprint prior to acceptance of the refereed
> postprint are rather far-fetched (e.g., making corrections in it).
> (4) But the short answer to your query is this: No, there is nothing either
> defensible or enforceable that a publisher can do or say to prevent a
> researcher from personally distributing individual copies of his own
> research findings to individual researchers, for research purposes, in any
> form he wishes, analog or digital, at any time. That is what researchers
> have been doing for many decades, whether or not their right to do so was
> formally enshrined in a publisher's "author-re-use" document.
> SAGE is a ROMEO pale-green
> publisher: http://romeo.eprints.org/publishers/65.html
> That means they endorse authors making their pre-refereeing preprints Open
> Access immediately (and they endorse making authors' refereed postprints
> Open Access after a one-year embargo). During the embargo, SAGE authors
> (like any authors) are of course free to send an individual copy (whether
> analog or digital) of their refereed postprint to any individual user who
> requests an individual copy for research purposes. Nor is SAGE or any
> publisher entitled to dictate to the author how they may lick the stamp or
> stroke the key that will mail or email the reprint or eprint to the
> requester.
> If I may make one suggestion to researchers who are puzzling over what they
> can and cannot do with their published research articles: Please use common
> sense rather than falling into (or for) formalistic fatuity.
> Stevan Harnad
Received on Mon Jul 27 2009 - 16:20:10 BST