From: Marcus A Banks <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 21:57:14 +0000

Hello Sandy. Thank you for pointing me to your useful and valuable article.

I do not disagree that the changes I am proposing would be deeply
disruptive to established publishing practices (and to library
practices as well, for that matter).

But I would say that your effective advocacy of the publisher's
prerogatives assumes that publication business models developed prior
to the Web should carry over indefinitely into a post-Web era. Like
many others I believe we are in a period of epochal change for
academic libraries and scholarly publishers, which will take decades
to sort itself out. And unlike some other open access advocates I feel
that publishers will always have a valuable role in this sorting out.

We part ways on whether publishers will indefinitely require
copyright, as the entire copyright regime assumes that access to
content must be controlled. I think that publishers 50 years from now
will be thriving in other ways.

For more, please see this article -- particularly the "Opportunities
Ahead" section:

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0018.306?view=text;rgn=main

Marcus Banks

-----Original Message-----

From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 22:54:11 -0600

I guess the best way for me to reply is to refer you to my article
titled "On the Author's Addendum," which originally appeared in
Against the Grain (June 2008):

https://scholarsphere.psu.edu/files/9880vr511.

Sandy Thatcher


> From: Marcus A Banks <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 22:45:05 +0000
>
> Sandy, I am referring to the articles published in bioscience journals
> like Science or Cell, for which the authors transfer their copyright
> as a condition of publication.
>
> Obviously such a transfer grants a publisher legal entitlement to
> copyright, but we could see a different scenario in which authors
> retain their copyright and license publication.
>
> In the current scenario the individual(s) who do the intellectual
> labor no longer control the rights to their own work. In my view this
> grants a publisher legal copyright but not "moral authority." This is
> why I perceive an intractable conflict between author rights and
> copyright retention for publishers. I am very interested in why you do
> not see it this way.
>
> This entire conversation assumes that publication in a traditional
> journal is required for disseminating an idea or research output --
> which it certainly is in a "publish or perish" sense, but not
> technically. Elsevier's power against SciHub ultimately rests on the
> fact that scholars are still wedded to a publication model that
> pre-dates the Web. Thinking beyond the PDF and monograph, my hope is
> that publishers and librarians can work together to build and promote
> services for Web-enabled scholarship.
>
> Marcus Banks
> Blaisdell Medical Library, UC Davis
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 23:23:43 -0600
>
> Please explain what you mean by querying whether publishers'  IP is
> legitimate. I have been a strong advocate of OA for more than two
> decades, but i also have been a member of the Copyright Committee of
> the Association of American Publishers since 1974. I do not see any
> contradiction in being both.
>
> Sandy Thatcher