From: "Hamaker, Charles" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 05:21:43 +0000

Uniform transfers of copyright obviously make publishers' lives' simpler.

And to standardize rights that those contracts by authors might
invoke, publishers have taken to demanding, in contracts with
institutions, that the institution acknowledge the publisher owns the
copyright, or has  proprietary content on their website . Once this
untruth is acknowledged, there's no need to PROVE the publisher owns
anything.  Authorial emendations to contracts are meaningless in this
context.  The institution signing signals they agree and the publisher
- if they ever decided to take the institution to court for violating
license terms - need only waive the forced "acknowledge" statement in
the judge's face and poof -variable author contracts, CC-BY, OA
contracts, etc. all disappear from the discussion.

In fact for the individual institution being sued, the actual facts of
authorial negotiations magically disappear. Dr. O'Donnell is
absolutely right to question and refuse to sign a contract that
eviscerates his rights. But publishers have the answer to individually
negotiated authorial contracts.   So not only do most authors of those
articles and reviews and book chapters not see a dime from
CCC/publisher "subsidiary rights," but libraries are in essence
enjoined from even asking if the publisher can prove ownership of a
specific article should push come to shove.

Chuck
________________________________________

From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 10:48:24 -0400

Chuck,

Surely some CCC revenue ends up with authors, but CCC is not in a
position to know.  I am not defending (or attacking) CCC in saying
this; I'm simply trying to explain how it works.  CCC collects revenue
and remits a portion of that to the publishers of the content used.
CCC does not have access to the contracts that publishers have with
authors.  The CCC revenue is accounted for by publishers as subsidiary
rights income.  That income may or not be split (evenly or unevenly)
with authors.  It depends on the individual contract.  As a gross
generalization, most journal articles are not royalty-bearing for
authors, but most books are.  The number of exceptions and
qualifications to what I just wrote is endless.

Joe Esposito


On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 9:02 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: "Hamaker, Charles" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 00:06:06 +0000
>
> And some of that CCC income stream ends up in author's pockets ?  I
> don't think so. I've got several articles CCC tracks. But never seen a
> cent.nor ever heard of any author of articles who has. When i asked
> the publisher assured me it wasn't large enough a source to warrant
> tracking it.
>
> Chuck