From: Jennifer Howard <[log in to unmask]> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 03:02:04 +0000 Perhaps Alicia Wise could comment on this from Elsevier's perspective. Best, Jennifer Howard Sent from my iPhone On Dec 12, 2013, at 9:42 PM, "LIBLICENSE" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > From: Laura Quilter <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:51:50 -0500 > > You have to sign in writing a transfer of copyright in the US. So, > Elsevier's copyright statement on your articles is what some have > termed "copyfraud". They certainly don't have the right to "enforce" > your copyright, and if they try to do so, you should push back -- > and hopefully make this widely-known! > > I suspect, actually, that a significant fraction of the so-called > copyright holdings of large academic publishers can't actually be > documented, and thus really belongs to the original authors, under > US law. Sadly there's probably no way to actually figure out the > numbers for this. > > Laura > > ---------------------------------- > Laura Markstein Quilter / [log in to unmask] > Attorney, Geek, Militant Librarian, Teacher > > Copyright and Information Policy Librarian > University of Massachusetts, Amherst > [log in to unmask] > > Lecturer, Simmons College, GSLIS > [log in to unmask] > > > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 6:38 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> From: Bob Persing <[log in to unmask]> >> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 09:17:11 -0500 >> >> >> On 12/10/2013 1:00 AM, LIBLICENSE-L automatic digest system wrote: >>> >>> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 15:40:57 -0500 >>> From: LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> >>> Subject: Re: Elsevier's Unforced Error >>> >>> From: "Pikas, Christina K." <[log in to unmask]> >>> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 09:49:22 -0500 >>> >>> At the risk of coming off as an Elsevier defender.... I'd like to make >>> some points in response: >>> >>> 1) Academia.edu is a private company running on venture capital - >>> presumably they aspire to make money on the content that users upload >>> >>> 2) Authors signed a legal agreement with the publisher to transfer >>> copyright. (many would argue that they shouldn't have, but they did, >>> or they wouldn't have been published) >> >> I think this is too broad a statement, at least in the case of Elsevier. >> >> I wrote several articles for an Elsevier journal in the early 2000s. >> At that time, they routinely sent authors a Transfer of Copyright >> form, and a cover letter which read in part: >> >> "If we do not hear from you by return, the article will carry a line >> in place of the copyright line merely indicating that Elsevier >> published the article." >> >> I never signed or returned any of the copyright forms. Yet every one >> of the articles, when published, included the line: >> >> "© 200[x] Elsevier Science, Inc." >> >> If one of these articles was offered by a company like academia.edu, >> would Elsevier have the legal right to send them a takedown notice? I >> don't know. A court might say that since I didn't protest against the >> copyright statements when they were published, I tacitly agreed to >> them. Whether they would or not, though, I think the question is less >> obvious than it's been represented. >> >> Bob Persing >> Univ. of PA Library