From: Darby Orcutt <[log in to unmask]> Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 19:21:26 -0500 Thanks, Laura. This practice always seemed disingenuous at best, so this citation is great to have! Best, Darby On Wednesday, November 25, 2015, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > From: Laura Quilter <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 07:15:44 -0600 > > 17 USC 101 (the definitions portion of the Copyright Act) defines > transfer. An "exclusive license" is a transfer. So "retaining > copyright" but "exclusively licensing" all of the rights of copyright > is in fact a transfer of copyright. Also, it's still a transfer even > with time or geographic limitations, if the license is exclusive. > > A “transfer of copyright ownership” is an assignment, mortgage, > exclusive license, or any other conveyance, alienation, or > hypothecation of a copyright or of any of the exclusive rights > comprised in a copyright, whether or not it is limited in time or > place of effect, but not including a nonexclusive license. > > https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/101 > > ---------------------------------- > 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 Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 10:17 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> > >> From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]> > >> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 21:30:23 -0500 > >> > >> Maybe I misread the blog posting -- it seemed to me to say that one > >> option for an author is to transfer partial copyright, rather than the > >> full set of rights. > >> > >> We know that copyright can be divided, so one could theoretically > >> transfer certain rights and retain the rest. This type of division of > >> rights can be called a license, for sure -- but licenses can be > >> identified for any given period of time. For an author's license to > >> be a true "partial transfer of copyright," wouldn't it need to specify > >> that it is for the entire duration of the applicable copyright period? > >> > >> Are authors' licenses to publishers generally written with this kind > >> of specific language, in effect making them serve as a partial > >> copyright transfer? > >> > >> In the case of Haworth below, a non-exclusive license can't possibly > >> be a partial transfer of copyrights, can it? > >> > >> Or maybe I'm splitting hairs here. Or asking my question poorly. I > >> suppose I'm saying that a partial copyright transfer and a license are > >> not the same thing. > >> > >> Thoughts are welcomed. Ann