From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 22:41:20 -0500
Oh, gosh, Anthony and Sally, what romantics you are! You want the good
old days when you could work in simpler ways, when you might actually
know the name of the person who acquired what you published. But it's
a different world today, with large aggregations of publications being
sold to large aggregations of libraries. It's terribly impersonal,
with no prospect of turning back the wheels of time outside the pages
of a science fiction novel. We all hate these obnoxious contracts,
and perhaps the lawyers who draft them as well, but in a time of such
ferment about trading terms and intellectual property, the contract is
that momentary stay against confusion that we require to go about our
business. No one likes these things, but we need them.
Joe Esposito
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:04 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:56:43 +0000
>
> I want to back-up Sally on this. I was the publishing director of probably
> the first company to try to sell online versions of journals and I tried to
> avoid a licence by a pop-up for users which just told them what they could
> do with the article accessed. I consulted Ann herself. She told me any
> statement like this was a licence. Sally worked very hard in the UK to
> construct a model licence (PALS)which would be agreed by both the PA (and
> the ALPSP?) and JISC. It was agreed. Then JISC dropped out of the deal and
> did their own thing (as I recall).
>
> Anthony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sally Morris <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:11:59 +0000
>
> We all used to be perfectly content to sell/buy, respectively, print books
> and journals without any 'terms and conditions'. Yes, I know that what
> people can in principle do with e-publications is immeasurably scarier to
> publishers, but haven't we all added greatly to the cost of e-publications
> by involving expensive legal people on both sides to write and then
> negotiate these contracts?
>
> It's not just publishers who are to blame; some years ago, I understand that
> BMJ tried to do without an agreement for its online version, only to yield
> to customer pressure to reintroduce it!
>
> I'm sure you are all familiar with the various attempts there have been to
> simplify/standardise journal agreements - but how much success have they
> actually had?
>
> Sally
>
>
> Sally Morris
> South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex, UK BN13 3UU
> Email: [log in to unmask]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 22:04:43 -0500
>
> A brief contract with little detail is very good unless and until something
> goes wrong.
>
> Joe Esposito
|
