Re: Vanishing Act & Elsevier's reputation

[David Goodman <dgoodman@princeton.edu>]

I am asked from time to time whether there is any measure that Elsevier
can take that will restore its reputation among librarians and scientists
as a trustworthy academic publisher.

First, it must establish a policy about deletions that warrants that it
will remove no material for any other reason than the final order of a
court of competant jurisdiction.  (This does leave some extremely
difficult problems unresolved, and it these that Anthony appropriately
defers for discussion at Charleston next autumn.)

Second, as not a single one of the removed items falls within the above
class, it must restore every one of them. In view of the inconsistencies
to which Anthony refers, I cannot imagine that any responsible librarian
or author would have confidence in a policy statement, however
enlightened, without this proof.

If the Society for Human Immunology is unhappy at this, let them publish
future years of their journal elsewhere. At this point, it is more of an
embarrassment for Elsevier than an asset.

Speaking personally,

Dr. David Goodman
Princeton University Library
and
Palmer School of Library & Information Science, Long Island University
dgoodman@princeton.edu

----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Watkinson <anthony.watkinson@btopenworld.com>
Date: Friday, January 24, 2003 9:53 pm
Subject: Re: Vanishing Act

> It is clear from this summary that a lot of publishers within Elsevier are
> making their own decisions. As we know Elsevier have formulated a 
> policyto cover instances when they feel they should (wording 
> deliberate) delete e-files from their online database, but I strongly 
> suspect that the staff down the line have forgotten that the policy 
> exists. As a part-time publisher in a large organisation I am deluged 
> with advice and instructions and, I am sorry to say, I delete much of 
> it. Life in a large library cannot be that different.
> 
> However there are serious issues of principle here. The policy that
> Elsevier have formulated seems unacceptable to the library community.
> Elsevier have good record (see their copyright policy) for 
> changing their policies in response to reasoned objections. There is no 
> necessary antagonism between publisher and librarian in this area and 
> guidelines can be drawn up and promulgated, which might become 
> conventions - the way a publisher acts naturally. In the print 
> environment there are masses of precedent. In the digital environment 
> there is little precedent as yet and a tendency (driven by the Internet 
> ethos and now fortunately going away)to assume that precedents and 
> experience do not matter.
> 
> Scott Plutchak, David Goodman and I have recommended a panel on this topic
> (what you do when online content infringes law or decency or 
> convention)at the 2003 Charleston Conference. It is also just the 
> sort of issue that IFLA should be taking up with IPA or (more realistic) 
> ARL with AAP and/orSTM. I know that some at STM are interested in dialogue.

> ...
> 
> Anthony Watkinson