RE: Ruling on Tasini Case

["Michael Spinella" <mspinell@aaas.org>]

Not being a lawyer, I could, of course, be mistaken, but I believe the
issue is not whether the author sold their work to the publication or gave
it freely. The real distinction should be whether the author transferred
copyright to the publisher or not. Copyright can be transferred with or
without the exchange of money; and fees may be paid with or without the
transfer of copyright.

I believe the Tasini case is solely related to those cases where the 
author has retained copyright. If the publishers had obtained the 
copyright, there would be no case, because the copyright holder has all 
the rights to disseminate the work, repurpose it, whatever, in any form 
they wish. If the author retains copyright (which is often the case with 
freelancers and seldom the case with scholars submitting to journals), 
then the publisher  must go back to the author for permission to issue the 
work in a new form or new medium. The original publication in print would 
have been covered by whatever license or rights were obtained when the 
article was first published. But the Court has now clarified that online 
publication rights do not automatically transfer along with print rights.

Mike Spinella

___________

>>> jad@maties.sun.ac.za 06/26/01 05:16PM >>>
Hello,

A cursory reading of the NY Times article posted earlier to this list
suggests that only freelancers that _sell_ their works to publishers are
affected by this ruling. "...the Supreme Court said free-lance writers may
control whether articles they sold for print in a regular newspaper or
magazine may be reproduced in electronic form."

Scholars, who tend to not receive remuneration for journal articles
submitted, are by that act entering into a different type of contract. I
imagine one would need to read the exact wording of the court ruling e.g.
their definition of 'freelancer' or 'regular newspaper or magazine' to
clarify matters. But my guess is that the ruling would not extend to
scholars, authors of monographs, and such. What makes the matter "major
news" would be that it sets a precedent for others to argue their
respective cases.

Regards,

Jennifer De Beer