[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Elsevier policy on article removal
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: Elsevier policy on article removal
- From: David Goodman <dgoodman@princeton.edu>
- Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 16:45:54 EST
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
I once more congratulate Elsevier on the further improvement in its policy. I am, reluctantly, prepared to recognize the realities of legal constraints on publishers. As has been suggested, probably the only practical way to cope with this is for there to be other copies of the files. Rather than everyone using the Elsevier SD server, at least some organizations should actually obtain the data files and run their own servers (as indeed some already do). The only change that I would propose is in > text will be replaced with a screen indicating that the article has been > removed for legal reasons. Considering the easy overuse of "legal reasons" in the past, even in instances when that was by no means the case, some indication should be given when possible. Most of the time a phrase such as "for reasons of copyright violation" , or even "because of a court order" can and should be used. "Legal reasons" just by itself is no longer credible. Now one step remains, to actually do what the policy says for the articles currently removed. I have considerable confidence in Elsevier's good intentions, but I will believe they have changed their practice when the prove it by their deeds. Dr. David Goodman Princeton University Library and Palmer School of Library & Information Science, Long Island University dgoodman@princeton.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Menefee, Daviess (ELS)" <D.Menefee@elsevier.com> Date: Wednesday, February 5, 2003 1:30 pm Subject: Elsevier policy on article removal > Dear Readers, > > Based on discussions with the library community and listening to > comments on this list and others, Elsevier has decided to revise its > policy of articleremoval from online products including ScienceDirect. > The revised policy is attached to this message in a Word format. Please > excuse the cross posting. > > As always, we look forward to your comments and opinions. > > Kind regards, > Daviess Menefee > Library Relations [SNIP]
- Prev by Date: RE: A bad case of DVD rot eats into movie collections
- Next by Date: Re: AMA pricing?
- Prev by thread: Seminar on DRM of Interest
- Next by thread: RE: Elsevier policy on article removal
- Index(es):