Re: Critique of APS Critique of NIH Proposal

["James A. Robinson" <jim.robinson@stanford.edu>]

> If I understand correctly, what the NIH proposal covers is the results
> of the research that it funds.  Unless there's an NIH proposal for
> publishing subsidies that I'm not aware of?

My question was aimed at whether or not the work-product of the
author/publisher cycle was still purely the "results of the research," or
whether or not the publisher had any rights due to their work on the
submitted paper. My previous questions were aimed at whether or not author
could or could not sign away distribution rights and whether the
government had any right to insert itself into that contract.

Bonnie Klein's email answered my question, I believe, with this assertion:

    The Government's agreement is with the grantee or contractor, not
    the publisher.  While the contractor or grantee may assign their
    copyright in "scientific and technical articles based on or containing
    data first produced in the performance of a contract" to a publisher,
    the Government's license rights attach to the articles upon creation
    and later assignment by the contractor to a publisher are subject
    to these rights.  The Government's license includes the right to
    distribute copies of the work to the public for government purpose.

The way I read this, it means the no author has ever had the legal right
to sign away sole distribution rights to any contract which didn't have a
clause for government funded research.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
James A. Robinson                       jim.robinson@stanford.edu
Stanford University HighWire Press      http://highwire.stanford.edu/
650-723-7294 (W) 650-725-9335 (F)