[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Elsevier's Vanishing Act
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu, reedelscustomers@lists.cc.utexas.edu
- Subject: Re: Elsevier's Vanishing Act
- From: David Goodman <dgoodman@princeton.edu>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 20:54:36 EST
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
I hardly need add to what has been said about the need for the integrity of the scholarly record, or the responsibility of a scholarly publisher or library. Print articles do not disappear in the cases mentioned. Electronic journals offer the opportunity to do better than print--to attach permanently to the article a notice of the retraction and the reason. I'd certainly use a link, as has been suggested, but I would propose doing yet more: an overprint or header so that all printed copies would carry the notice. This would serve to deter misconduct, to warn of fraud, to publicize misconduct, to apologise for plagiarism. The instances of true public danger have so far been approximately zero--and once the article is published at all, the danger is irretrievable. I would not like any governmental body in, say, the PRC, to decide on what published scholarship constitutes a public danger. Obvious a court or the equivalent can force a publisher, but there is nothing to gain by anticipating this. The protection here is replica servers in many locations, so no government can reach them all. I congratulate Elsevier for having come as far as it has. As I understand their current guidelines, the Human Immunology article would not have been removed. Simultaneously, I would encourage them to go further, along the lines just outlined. The only acceptable policy is to remove nothing. Publishers can adequately protect themselves by better editing and reviewing, which would have prevented all the cas es mentioned. The best step at this point is for Elsevier to restore the material. This will prove a much more convincing statement than any merely verbal reassurance. It will be consistent with their position in the profession, and will also be an excellent precedent for the future -- for all publishers. My personal view. Dr. David Goodman Princeton University and Palmer School of Library & Information Science, Long Island University dgoodman@princeton.edu
- Prev by Date: Vanishing Act
- Next by Date: REMINDER: ARL Advanced Licensing Workshop
- Prev by thread: REMINDER: ARL Advanced Licensing Workshop
- Next by thread: RE: Elsevier's Vanishing Act
- Index(es):