[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: New US Bill re. Copyright/Federal Funding
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: RE: New US Bill re. Copyright/Federal Funding
- From: jean.claude.guedon@umontreal.ca
- Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 16:54:14 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
This is an amusing response. As if cynicism could not become standard practice... Jean-Claude Guedon -----Original Message----- From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu on behalf of Joseph J. Esposito Sent: Wed 9/17/2008 6:35 PM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: Re: New US Bill re. Copyright/Federal Funding I note the following from this thread: "it is standard publishing industry practice to pretend to assert protection for authors because that appears to make the fight more idealistic." JE: This is too strong. Every publishing contract I have ever seen has a clause in it to the effect that the publisher has a positive obligation to protect the author's copyright. No doubt there are contracts (works for hire, etc.) where this is not stipulated, but to call cynicism a standard practice is overreaching. (I have no opinion as to the legal issues surrounding the NIH matter.) Joe Esposito
- Prev by Date: Re: New US Bill re. Copyright/Federal Funding
- Next by Date: Re: Copyright Review Management System - U of Michigan IMLS grant
- Previous by thread: Re: New US Bill re. Copyright/Federal Funding
- Next by thread: RE: New US Bill re. Copyright/Federal Funding
- Index(es):