1194 lines
54 KiB
Plaintext
1194 lines
54 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
+ Page 1 +
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review
|
|
|
|
Volume 4, Number 4 (1993) ISSN 1048-6542
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
To retrieve an article file as an e-mail message, send the GET
|
|
command given after the article information to LISTSERV@UHUPVM1
|
|
(BITNET) or LISTSERV@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU (Internet). To retrieve the
|
|
article as a file, omit "F=MAIL" from the end of the GET command.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
COMMUNICATIONS
|
|
|
|
Model University Policy Regarding Faculty Publication in
|
|
Scientific and Technical Scholarly Journals: A Background Paper
|
|
and Review of the Issues
|
|
|
|
By TRLN Copyright Policy Task Force (pp. 4-25)
|
|
|
|
To retrieve this file: GET TRLN PRV4N4 F=MAIL
|
|
|
|
The basic problem with the current scholarly journal system is
|
|
the incompatibility between the non-economic goals of academic
|
|
researchers and the largely economic goals of commercial and even
|
|
some not-for-profit publishers. When authors of scholarly
|
|
journal articles assign their copyright to commercial publishers,
|
|
they also give away the ability to control the conditions under
|
|
which their research results are disseminated. This paper
|
|
discusses the current system's problems and shares a vision for a
|
|
more positive future. It includes a model copyright policy that
|
|
would keep the ownership and control of scholarly information in
|
|
the hands of research scholars and their institutions, thus
|
|
ensuring that their publications can be widely distributed
|
|
electronically at the lowest possible costs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
COLUMNS
|
|
|
|
Public-Access Provocations: An Informal Column
|
|
|
|
Trust Us
|
|
|
|
By Walt Crawford (pp. 26-28)
|
|
|
|
To retrieve this file: GET CRAWFORD PRV4N4 F=MAIL
|
|
|
|
+ Page 2 +
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Editor-in-Chief
|
|
|
|
Charles W. Bailey, Jr.
|
|
University Libraries
|
|
University of Houston
|
|
Houston, TX 77204-2091
|
|
(713) 743-9804
|
|
LIB3@UHUPVM1 (BITNET) or LIB3@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU (Internet)
|
|
|
|
Associate Editors
|
|
|
|
Columns: Leslie Pearse, OCLC
|
|
Communications: Dana Rooks, University of Houston
|
|
Reviews: Roy Tennant, University of California, Berkeley
|
|
|
|
Editorial Board
|
|
|
|
Ralph Alberico, University of Texas, Austin
|
|
George H. Brett II, Clearinghouse for Networked Information
|
|
Discovery and Retrieval
|
|
Steve Cisler, Apple Computer, Inc.
|
|
Walt Crawford, Research Libraries Group
|
|
Lorcan Dempsey, University of Bath
|
|
Nancy Evans, Pennsylvania State University, Ogontz
|
|
Charles Hildreth, University of Washington
|
|
Ronald Larsen, University of Maryland
|
|
Clifford Lynch, Division of Library Automation,
|
|
University of California
|
|
David R. McDonald, Tufts University
|
|
R. Bruce Miller, University of California, San Diego
|
|
Paul Evan Peters, Coalition for Networked Information
|
|
Mike Ridley, University of Waterloo
|
|
Peggy Seiden, Skidmore College
|
|
Peter Stone, University of Sussex
|
|
John E. Ulmschneider, North Carolina State University
|
|
|
|
Technical Support
|
|
|
|
Tahereh Jafari, University of Houston
|
|
|
|
+ Page 3 +
|
|
|
|
Publication Information
|
|
|
|
Published on an irregular basis by the University Libraries,
|
|
University of Houston. Technical support is provided by the
|
|
Information Technology Division, University of Houston.
|
|
Circulation: 7,386 subscribers in 56 countries (PACS-L) and 1,981
|
|
subscribers in 50 countries (PACS-P).
|
|
|
|
Back issues are available from LISTSERV@UHUPVM1 (BITNET) or
|
|
LISTSERV@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU (Internet). To retrieve a cumulative
|
|
index to the journal, send the following e-mail message to the
|
|
LISTSERV: GET INDEX PR F=MAIL.
|
|
|
|
The first two volumes of The Public-Access Computer Systems
|
|
Review are also available in book form from the American Library
|
|
Association's Library and Information Technology Association
|
|
(LITA). Volume three is forthcoming. The price of each volume
|
|
is $17 for LITA members and $20 for non-LITA members. To order,
|
|
contact: ALA Publishing Services, Order Department, 50 East Huron
|
|
Street, Chicago, IL 60611-2729, (800) 545-2433.
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review is an electronic
|
|
journal that is distributed on BITNET, Internet, and other
|
|
computer networks. There is no subscription fee.
|
|
To subscribe, send an e-mail message to LISTSERV@UHUPVM1
|
|
(BITNET) or LISTSERV@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU (Internet) that says:
|
|
SUBSCRIBE PACS-P First Name Last Name. PACS-P subscribers also
|
|
receive three electronic newsletters: Current Cites, LITA
|
|
Newsletter, and Public-Access Computer Systems News.
|
|
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review is Copyright (C)
|
|
1993 by the University Libraries, University of Houston. All
|
|
Rights Reserved.
|
|
Copying is permitted for noncommercial use by academic
|
|
computer centers, computer conferences, individual scholars, and
|
|
libraries. Libraries are authorized to add the journal to their
|
|
collection, in electronic or printed form, at no charge. This
|
|
message must appear on all copied material. All commercial use
|
|
requires permission.
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
+ Page 26 +
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Public-Access Provocations: An Informal Column
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Crawford, Walt. "Trust Us." The Public-Access Computer Systems
|
|
Review 4, no. 4 (1993): 26-28. To retrieve this file, send the
|
|
following e-mail message to LISTSERV@UHUPVM1 or
|
|
LISTSERV@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU: GET CRAWFORD PRV4N4 F=MAIL.
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Michael Buckland and other researchers at the University of
|
|
California at Berkeley have been doing some interesting research
|
|
with an experimental front-end to the MELVYL system, looking at
|
|
ways to improve user success with online catalogs. Buckland
|
|
suggested some changes to improve retrieval during a program on
|
|
"The Evolving Online Catalogs," sponsored by the LITA Online
|
|
Catalogs Interest Group at the 1993 ALA Annual Conference in New
|
|
Orleans; he's also published various findings and suggestions.
|
|
According to Xiao-Yan Shen's report on Buckland's talk (in
|
|
the Fall 1993 LITA Newsletter, page 21):
|
|
|
|
In order to make better use of existing catalog records we
|
|
should have more powerful commands such as FEWER and
|
|
SUMMARIZE. FEWER limits the size of retrieved sets by
|
|
assuming reasonable default preferences--e.g.: find subject
|
|
napoleon might retrieve 4,580 hits. Successive uses of
|
|
FEWER might do the following:
|
|
|
|
-limit to Berkeley holdings (2,259)
|
|
-limit to English-language (853)
|
|
-limit to last 10 years (73)
|
|
-limit to last 3 years (30)
|
|
-limit to books (26)
|
|
|
|
SUMMARIZE finds all the subject headings in all
|
|
retrieved records and lists them by their frequencies.
|
|
MORE finds more books with the same author or subject.
|
|
|
|
Tossing Fish to the Users
|
|
|
|
There's not a lot to say about MORE or SUMMARIZE. I can't
|
|
imagine that you'd offer MORE without asking WHICH author or
|
|
subject, which means it's the same related-record function that
|
|
Dynix has had for roughly a decade, and is also in Unicorn,
|
|
Eureka, and several other systems.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 27 +
|
|
|
|
My problem is with FEWER--not with the idea of reducing
|
|
search results by offering plausible limits. That's a fine idea,
|
|
and one that should be suggested (or at least offered as help)
|
|
whenever a result exceeds some defined number of records. We do
|
|
that in Eureka (RLG's new patron-oriented search service), and so
|
|
do a fair number of other systems.
|
|
What we don't do (and this is what I question) is give users
|
|
an option like FEWER and simply apply some predefined set of
|
|
limits, one at a time. That's tossing them fish, in the old
|
|
adage. I prefer to teach them how to fish: show them what limits
|
|
are available and how to use them and let the users decide what
|
|
limits make sense.
|
|
I don't mean to pick on Michael Buckland (although he's
|
|
certainly able to defend himself). I think what he's suggesting
|
|
is one common trend in hot new search-system design: giving the
|
|
users "what they need" without telling them how they got it.
|
|
|
|
Trust and Skepticism
|
|
|
|
One crucial part of "information literacy," although it isn't
|
|
mentioned much, is skepticism. People still tend to assume that
|
|
if it comes from a computer (or if it comes from the Internet),
|
|
it must be right--a disturbing and potentially dangerous
|
|
assumption.
|
|
In this instance, it's important for users to be able to
|
|
understand how they are reducing the size of their results, as
|
|
well as the implications of those reductions. Using the example
|
|
above, is it really fair to assume that books about Napoleon
|
|
written since 1990 are really more suitable than those written
|
|
earlier? Why would that be true? If newer automatically means
|
|
better, then I assume that the newest biography of Robert Kennedy
|
|
is the best one--right?
|
|
And if a user is looking for material by The Beatles and
|
|
uses this set of FEWERs, he or she will be a bit dismayed by the
|
|
results, which include none of the recordings, none of the
|
|
movies, but probably some discographies or fairly arcane books
|
|
about some aspects of the group's career.
|
|
But look at the example again and explore it a bit in online
|
|
catalogs. The worst problem here is that "Napoleon" as a subject
|
|
search is pretty awful. In Eureka, it returns more than 1,000
|
|
subject headings as a word search and only four titles as a
|
|
phrase search. So, if you've narrowed this collection down, what
|
|
are these books about? Jose Napoleon Duarte? Napoleon Lajoie
|
|
(American League batting champion in 1901, 1902, and 1904)?
|
|
Napoleon, Ohio? The Code Napoleon? Napoleon II or III? Or,
|
|
most probably, Napoleon I?
|
|
|
|
+ Page 28 +
|
|
|
|
Have we really done the borrower a favor by turning a poor
|
|
search into an arbitrarily small result, one that may or may not
|
|
have much to do with what's wanted? Not in my book. Sorry, but
|
|
I don't trust computer-controlled choices, and I don't think
|
|
others should either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
About the Author
|
|
|
|
Walt Crawford, The Research Libraries Group, Inc., 1200 Villa
|
|
Street, Mountain View, CA 94041-1100. Internet:
|
|
BR.WCC@RLG.STANFORD.EDU.
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review is an electronic
|
|
journal that is distributed on BITNET, Internet, and other
|
|
computer networks. There is no subscription fee.
|
|
To subscribe, send an e-mail message to LISTSERV@UHUPVM1
|
|
(BITNET) or LISTSERV@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU (Internet) that says:
|
|
SUBSCRIBE PACS-P First Name Last Name. PACS-P subscribers also
|
|
receive three electronic newsletters: Current Cites, LITA
|
|
Newsletter, and Public-Access Computer Systems News.
|
|
This article is Copyright (C) 1993 by Walt Crawford. All
|
|
Rights Reserved.
|
|
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review is Copyright (C)
|
|
1993 by the University Libraries, University of Houston. All
|
|
Rights Reserved.
|
|
Copying is permitted for noncommercial use by academic
|
|
computer centers, computer conferences, individual scholars, and
|
|
libraries. Libraries are authorized to add the journal to their
|
|
collection, in electronic or printed form, at no charge. This
|
|
message must appear on all copied material. All commercial use
|
|
requires permission.
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
+ Page 4 +
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
TRLN Copyright Policy Task Force. "Model University Policy
|
|
Regarding Faculty Publication in Scientific and Technical
|
|
Scholarly Journals: A Background Paper and Review of the Issues."
|
|
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review 4, no. 4 (1993): 4-25.
|
|
To retrieve this file, send the following e-mail message to
|
|
LISTSERV@UHUPVM1 or LISTSERV@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU: GET TRLN PRV4N4
|
|
F=MAIL.
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
1.0 Introduction
|
|
|
|
The attached model policy was drafted by a joint committee of
|
|
faculty, librarians, and university press editors from Duke
|
|
University, North Carolina State University, and the University
|
|
of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. [1] This effort is part of a
|
|
two-year project of the Triangle Research Libraries Network
|
|
(TRLN) to develop strategies and plans for cooperative
|
|
information resources development in the sciences and
|
|
engineering. Grant support for the project has been provided by
|
|
the Council on Library Resources in Washington, D.C.
|
|
The distribution of this policy document is intended to
|
|
stimulate debate and consensus building among faculty,
|
|
librarians, university administrators, and scholarly publishers
|
|
throughout the United States and abroad. The TRLN Copyright
|
|
Policy Task Force does not expect that such a policy will be
|
|
adopted unilaterally by any one institution. Rather, we believe
|
|
the eventual widespread adoption of such a policy by consortia or
|
|
national associations of universities could help to reduce the
|
|
current barriers to the effective dissemination of new research,
|
|
especially in science and engineering scholarly journals.
|
|
Since the widespread distribution of the first draft of this
|
|
model university policy regarding faculty publication in
|
|
scholarly journals, the Task Force has received dozens of letters
|
|
and electronic mail messages with both positive and negative
|
|
reactions to the model, many offering specific suggestions to
|
|
change, clarify, or improve the policy. While the majority of
|
|
those writing supported the thrust of the proposed policy and
|
|
encouraged the Task Force to find ways to work towards its
|
|
adoption by universities, a substantial minority expressed
|
|
concerns about specific features of the policy or a confusion
|
|
about the problems being addressed and the goals to be achieved.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 5 +
|
|
|
|
With this paper the Task Force seeks to clarify its view of
|
|
the problems which the current system of scholarly communication
|
|
through journals is causing and to share a vision for a future
|
|
where these problems are removed or, at least, alleviated. In
|
|
the process, this essay will also respond to the primary
|
|
criticisms received regarding the first draft of the model
|
|
policy. Finally, with this paper the Task Force is distributing
|
|
a model policy document incorporating many of the specific
|
|
suggestions it received for improvement.
|
|
|
|
2.0 The Current Scholarly Journal Publishing System
|
|
|
|
University and other national research libraries have supported
|
|
and helped to fuel the astounding growth in scientific and
|
|
technical research, both by serving as the primary locus for the
|
|
dissemination of new research results and as comprehensive
|
|
archives for access to the historical record of past research.
|
|
However, the numbers and prices of scholarly journals, especially
|
|
that portion published in scientific and technical disciplines,
|
|
have increased at annual rates that far exceed general rates of
|
|
inflation and the acquisitions budget resources of research
|
|
libraries. The result is that, individually and collectively,
|
|
research libraries are acquiring a smaller and smaller proportion
|
|
of the world's published research and the balance of these
|
|
acquisitions has been skewed away from books to pay the spiraling
|
|
cost of journals.
|
|
The unrelenting growth in both numbers and prices of
|
|
scientific and technical journals has also exacerbated
|
|
distortions in the general economic marketplace for research
|
|
information. This marketplace, unlike the free market ideal
|
|
posited by economic theorists, is characterized by producers
|
|
(academic researchers) who give over gratis, through copyright
|
|
transfer, the ownership of their products (journal articles) to
|
|
sellers (both not-for-profit and commercial publishers).
|
|
Publishers, in turn, cover costs or earn profits by selling, not
|
|
primarily to the ultimate consumers (other researchers and their
|
|
students), but largely to public or not-for-profit agencies
|
|
(research libraries) who are responsible for organizing, storing,
|
|
and providing free or low-cost access to these products. As
|
|
Herbert White, then dean of the Indiana University School of
|
|
Library and Information Science, said, "natural selection and the
|
|
pressures of the marketplace simply do not apply here." [2]
|
|
|
|
+ Page 6 +
|
|
|
|
An increasing percentage of scientific and technical
|
|
journals are now published, not by professional societies and
|
|
universities, but by a relatively small number of very large
|
|
commercial publishing conglomerates, many based in Europe. At
|
|
the same time, the subscriber base of many of these journals has
|
|
shifted so that it is now almost exclusively research libraries
|
|
rather than individual research scholars. And, as many
|
|
economists have noted, this growing for-profit journal publishing
|
|
industry presents almost ideal conditions for an effective
|
|
monopoly:
|
|
|
|
A. Libraries are reluctant to cancel subscriptions when
|
|
the prices go up (they have a low "price elasticity of
|
|
demand" for these products) because there are few if
|
|
any alternative sources for the information contained
|
|
in each journal.
|
|
|
|
B. The small number of publishers relative to the number
|
|
of library subscribers permits more control of supply
|
|
than in a more competitive industry.
|
|
|
|
C. Many opportunities exist for price discrimination,
|
|
between institutions and individuals as well as between
|
|
U.S. and European subscribers, based on differing price
|
|
elasticities of demand and currency fluctuations.
|
|
|
|
Feeding this publishing industry is an academic tenure and grants
|
|
system which rewards researchers with grants and career
|
|
advancement when they publish large numbers of papers. [3] In
|
|
trade and mass market publishing, both authors and publishers
|
|
feel encouraged or constrained by the forces of the economic
|
|
marketplace; both recognize the potential value of profits to be
|
|
earned from sales, future film rights, etc., with these
|
|
intellectual "properties." Thus, authors in this more commercial
|
|
environment reasonably transfer only limited rights to publishers
|
|
and negotiate royalties. By contrast, in scholarly journal
|
|
article publishing, authors do not assume they will earn any
|
|
direct economic rewards from their articles, so they "make a
|
|
contribution" to the literature by freely assigning all ownership
|
|
rights to publishers.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 7 +
|
|
|
|
The basic problem in the current system for publishing
|
|
scholarly journal articles, therefore, is incompatibility between
|
|
the non-economic goals of academic researchers and the largely
|
|
economic goals of commercial and even some not-for-profit
|
|
publishers. Academic researchers publish with the goals of
|
|
ensuring widespread distribution of their research results,
|
|
personal credit and recognition, and career advancement. Many
|
|
commercial publishers create and market journals with the sole
|
|
goals of identifying potentially profitable market niches or
|
|
monopolies for their products. The recent growth and market
|
|
power of several very large international publishing corporations
|
|
have brought into focus the distortions and potential dangers
|
|
when commercial interests intrude too heavily into the
|
|
international channels of scholarly communication.
|
|
In an indirect but important and fundamental way, copyright
|
|
practices in scholarly publishing aggravate the marketplace
|
|
monopoly distortions caused by the growth of the large for-profit
|
|
scientific and technical journal publishing conglomerates. When
|
|
authors of scholarly journal articles assign copyright in their
|
|
intellectual property to commercial publishers, they also give
|
|
away the ability to control the conditions under which their
|
|
research results are disseminated. For this reason, the Task
|
|
Force believes a first step towards controlling the spiraling
|
|
costs of scientific and technical journals is to bring the
|
|
products produced (the articles) back under the control of the
|
|
producers (the research scholars and their universities).
|
|
The Task Force hopes the above brief statement of the
|
|
problem is helpful. For a more complete understanding of the
|
|
scientific and technical journal pricing problem and its various
|
|
ramifications for research libraries and the entire scholarly
|
|
communication system, see the articles and books listed in the
|
|
bibliography at the end of this paper.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 8 +
|
|
|
|
3.0 Reforming the Current System
|
|
|
|
This model university policy is just one part of a whole series
|
|
of changes needed in the current system of scholarly
|
|
communication through journals. A major hurdle to be surmounted
|
|
is the considerable investment all participants have in
|
|
perpetuating the current system. Scholarly journals have been
|
|
published according to essentially the same rules and in
|
|
essentially the same format for well over 200 years. Returning
|
|
ownership and control of research results to the individuals and
|
|
institutions who generate them in the first place is a critical
|
|
first step in moving towards a future where research results are
|
|
peer reviewed and then disseminated electronically to the
|
|
worldwide scholarly community at reasonable costs. Research
|
|
universities with their research libraries and presses as well as
|
|
national and international associations of scholars in the
|
|
various scientific and technical disciplines should be working
|
|
together closely as partners. This will help to ensure that
|
|
research results are disseminated at reasonable cost to those who
|
|
need it. Researchers and all other participants in the scholarly
|
|
communication system must come to a clearer understanding of and
|
|
consensus about the fundamental goals of scholarly communication.
|
|
These fundamental goals can be reduced to three:
|
|
|
|
1. To ensure that the worldwide community of researchers
|
|
has rapid, convenient access at reasonable cost to the
|
|
validated results of all relevant research.
|
|
|
|
2. To assure researchers and students seeking information
|
|
about research results in any discipline that the
|
|
results "published" have been carefully reviewed by
|
|
peer experts to meet high research quality standards
|
|
and then carefully edited for clear and accurate
|
|
presentation.
|
|
|
|
3. To ensure that future generations of researchers will
|
|
have undistorted, convenient access at reasonable cost
|
|
to the results of important research conducted today
|
|
and in the past.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 9 +
|
|
|
|
What, then, would be characteristics of the ideal scholarly
|
|
communication system of the future? The Task Force suggests the
|
|
following key ingredients:
|
|
|
|
A. Initial publication of peer-reviewed and edited
|
|
research results would be in journals supported by
|
|
universities, scholarly associations, or other
|
|
organizations sharing the mission to promote
|
|
widespread, reasonable-cost access to research
|
|
information.
|
|
|
|
B. Electronic publication via the publicly supported
|
|
portion of the worldwide Internet would be the
|
|
preferred means for most disciplines.
|
|
|
|
C. Research libraries would remain the primary access
|
|
nodes and archival repositories for print and
|
|
electronic collections of published research results.
|
|
|
|
D. Some publishers would be licensed by individual
|
|
researchers, university presses, and scholarly
|
|
associations primarily to publish special compilations,
|
|
indexes, or other value-added products for sale where
|
|
potentially profitable markets exist for these
|
|
secondary, value-added information resources.
|
|
|
|
E. The technical systems and scholarly communication
|
|
policies needed to support this new scholarly
|
|
communication system would grow out of consensus
|
|
deliberations and collaboration among associations of
|
|
research libraries, research universities and their
|
|
publishing arms, and societies or associations of
|
|
researchers in the various scientific and technical
|
|
disciplines.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 10 +
|
|
|
|
4.0 Criticism of the Original TRLN Model Policy
|
|
|
|
The critical responses received after distribution of the
|
|
original version of the model policy fit roughly into four broad
|
|
themes:
|
|
|
|
1. Individual retention of copyright and the granting of
|
|
blanket permission for noncommercial reproduction of
|
|
articles for educational and research purposes, if
|
|
applied indiscriminately to all publishers, would also
|
|
threaten the revenues of university and association
|
|
not-for-profit publishers, who should be seen as allies
|
|
in the struggle to control escalating journal costs.
|
|
|
|
2. Retention of copyright by academic researchers will not
|
|
by itself change the pricing practices of commercial
|
|
publishers.
|
|
|
|
3. Retention of copyright would place undue burdens on
|
|
individual researchers. They would struggle to find
|
|
suitable low-cost publication outlets for their
|
|
articles and would have to respond to many requests to
|
|
use or reproduce their published articles.
|
|
|
|
4. Retention of copyright by authors could impede efforts
|
|
by publishers to license complete collections of
|
|
articles for electronic distribution via compact disks
|
|
or over national and international networks.
|
|
|
|
The remainder of this paper describes how the model university
|
|
policy and the recommendations above respond to these criticisms.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 11 +
|
|
|
|
4.1 The Policy Would Hurt Not-for-Profit Publishers
|
|
|
|
University, association, and other not-for-profit publishers are
|
|
essential to effective scholarly communication and, in fact, need
|
|
to be strengthened to become once again the primary locus of
|
|
scientific and technical journal publishing. These scholarly
|
|
publishers should be partners with research libraries in the
|
|
struggle to control the escalating costs of scientific and
|
|
technical journals. The model policy now makes clear the
|
|
positive role that not-for-profit publishers, and others whose
|
|
subscription prices are rationally related to the actual costs of
|
|
journal production, have played and should continue to play in
|
|
providing widespread distribution of research results at
|
|
reasonable costs. Research published by university and most
|
|
association presses remains essentially within the community of
|
|
university research scholars and, thus, under university control.
|
|
No change in current copyright transfer practices is needed with
|
|
these scholarly presses because they share the fundamental values
|
|
of university-based scholarly research and a common vision for
|
|
the future of scholarly communication.
|
|
Some critics noted that research universities (unlike the
|
|
commercial publishing conglomerates) are capital-poor and, thus,
|
|
in a poor position to compete for the scientific and technical
|
|
scholarly journal market. [4] As the transformation to a
|
|
worldwide electronic network for scientific communication
|
|
accelerates, however, the billions of dollars currently tied up
|
|
in university research library subscriptions, binding, and
|
|
storage could be freed to provide the necessary capital. It is
|
|
also important to note that university faculty and computer
|
|
centers are largely responsible for the growth and development of
|
|
the Internet as we know it today. Thus, universities are
|
|
well-positioned to manage and make efficient use of this
|
|
scholarly communication infrastructure of the future. But to do
|
|
so they must seize the initiative. The Task Force hopes the
|
|
model policy will help to convince university faculty and
|
|
administrators of the need to take these matters seriously.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 12 +
|
|
|
|
4.2 The Policy Will Not Change Publishers' Pricing Practices
|
|
|
|
Adoption of the model policy by large numbers of universities
|
|
should help to reestablish the central role of the university and
|
|
not-for-profit association presses in scientific and technical
|
|
scholarly journal publishing. Provided that the policy is
|
|
accompanied by major efforts to strengthen university-based
|
|
publishing, as recommended throughout this document, the policy
|
|
can help to foster the growth of alternative outlets for
|
|
publication of research results. As one respondent noted, many
|
|
commercial and not-for-profit journal publishers already give
|
|
authors the option of retaining copyright for their articles.
|
|
These publishers, however, also usually specify in a license
|
|
agreement the publisher's right to republish or to permit others
|
|
(with or without the payment of fees) to republish or translate
|
|
the work. The Task Force argues that retention of copyright is a
|
|
necessary precondition for the scholarly research community
|
|
collectively to strengthen existing mechanisms or to develop
|
|
alternative low-cost mechanisms for the dissemination of research
|
|
results.
|
|
Keep in mind the basic purpose of the scholarly journal
|
|
communication system for the creators and ultimate consumers of
|
|
the articles published: to validate the quality of research
|
|
results, edit them, and make them available to the worldwide
|
|
community of researchers for use in further research and
|
|
teaching. Only by individually and collectively reestablishing
|
|
control over the raw materials they produce will research
|
|
scholars be able to work together with libraries and publishers
|
|
to ensure a scholarly communication system that addresses the
|
|
basic goal of widespread, low-cost dissemination of peer reviewed
|
|
research results, rather than acceptable profit margins for
|
|
commercial publishing conglomerates.
|
|
One possible result of general retention of copyright by
|
|
authors could be a reduction of both commercial and not-for-
|
|
profit publishers' revenues, without a concomitant reduction in
|
|
their expenses. This decline in revenues could occur both
|
|
through a reduction of the subsidiary income currently earned by
|
|
some publishers from the granting of permission for reproduction
|
|
of articles and through a reduction of the number of their
|
|
journal subscribers. This would be especially true where access
|
|
to journal articles becomes readily available through online
|
|
electronic networks rather than the current system of print
|
|
journal subscriptions.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 13 +
|
|
|
|
Adoption of the model policy by large numbers of
|
|
universities should help to reestablish the central role of
|
|
university and not-for-profit association presses in scientific
|
|
and technical scholarly journal publishing and also to strengthen
|
|
their financial health. Universities and their faculty must be
|
|
able to meet their responsibilities to society as well as to
|
|
present and future generations of researchers in and out of
|
|
academia worldwide. Without ready access to the published
|
|
results of university research, research progress would simply
|
|
not be possible. Only by retaining copyrights within the
|
|
academic community of research scholars, can those who generate
|
|
the research results maintain an effective system of scholarly
|
|
communication that meets the information needs of research
|
|
scholars and their students.
|
|
|
|
4.3 The Policy Will Put Too Many Burdens on Research Faculty
|
|
|
|
If individual faculty, unsupported by their institutions and
|
|
professional associations, immediately attempt to follow the
|
|
guidelines outlined in this policy, they would almost certainly
|
|
find it more difficult to locate appropriate publication outlets
|
|
for their research results. But when and if the policy becomes
|
|
standard practice in most academic settings and suitable
|
|
electronic or print alternatives to commercially published
|
|
journals are available, then publication will hinge on the
|
|
quality and originality of the research results submitted for
|
|
"publication," rather than on the marketplace viability (i.e.,
|
|
profitability) of particular journals. The international
|
|
computer and telecommunications networks, with their growing
|
|
capacity and pervasiveness in research settings, hold great
|
|
promise as the preferred mechanism for most scholarly
|
|
communication. In the sciences and technology, electronic
|
|
journals, with worldwide network access mechanisms, eventually
|
|
will replace traditional print-on-paper journals, especially if
|
|
these networks are managed to preserve low-cost access for
|
|
scholarly communication purposes.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 14 +
|
|
|
|
As for the criticism that the policy would force researchers
|
|
to respond to large numbers of requests to use or reproduce their
|
|
articles, this issue is specifically addressed with the model
|
|
policy stipulation that authors, who are unable to locate a
|
|
university, society, association or other suitable publication
|
|
channel, insist that a notice be included as a footnote on the
|
|
first page of the article giving blanket permission "for the
|
|
noncommercial reproduction of the complete work for educational
|
|
or research purposes." Thus, routine copying of articles for
|
|
classroom use in courses and for interlibrary loan would be
|
|
permitted without the need to request permission from the author.
|
|
Faculty authors may also want to consider contractual agreements
|
|
that give the publisher a nonexclusive right to sell licenses, at
|
|
agreed-upon reasonable rates to commercial copy services such as
|
|
Kinko's and Copytron which produce "course packs" of photocopied
|
|
articles for sale to students for specific university courses.
|
|
The Task Force also recommends that universities explore
|
|
ways of providing advice, support, and managerial services for
|
|
handling copyright and permissions matters on behalf of their
|
|
faculty (or association members), perhaps in collaboration with a
|
|
local university press. This is a vital element in any system
|
|
that would make it possible to bypass some publishers on
|
|
permissions matters. There is an excellent non-commercial reason
|
|
for publishers, universities, or associations to manage faculty
|
|
copyrights in scholarly journal articles: an institution is
|
|
readily findable by a permissions requestor, because its address
|
|
is listed in the journal and if it moves it leaves a clear trail.
|
|
The author in a great many cases is not findable at all, or only
|
|
at the cost of an enormous amount of work.
|
|
|
|
4.4 The Policy Would Impede Electronic Distribution
|
|
|
|
The Task Force disagrees with the notion that the distribution of
|
|
research articles by means of CD-ROM or over national and
|
|
international electronic networks would be impeded if the model
|
|
university policy were widely adopted. The Task Force is far
|
|
more concerned about the threat of commercial ownership and
|
|
control of scholarly information in the networked electronic
|
|
environment of the future. [5] As early as the mid-1980s Carlton
|
|
Rochell pointed out that even browsing can be curtailed where
|
|
electronically stored information is only available for a fee.
|
|
Paying for access to a database of journal articles means:
|
|
|
|
The user is required to pay to look at it to judge its
|
|
relevance. . . . a relatively new commercial principle not
|
|
too far applied in other sections of the information
|
|
industry, for example bookshops. . . . it is also not
|
|
applied in other industries. Imagine paying for the right
|
|
to look--just look--at Ford's . . . [new] models. [6]
|
|
|
|
+ Page 15 +
|
|
|
|
This model policy aims to keep the ownership and control of
|
|
scholarly information in the hands of research scholars and, by
|
|
extension, the universities and other not-for-profit agencies
|
|
that support scientific and technical research for the public
|
|
good. It would preserve the right of research scholars to ensure
|
|
that their original publications can be widely distributed
|
|
electronically at the lowest possible costs. This does not
|
|
preclude the possibility that commercial publishers could be
|
|
licensed to create publications or databases that add value to
|
|
the articles as first distributed and then market these to
|
|
libraries, other agencies, or individual researchers themselves.
|
|
The situation is analogous to that of information generated by
|
|
U.S. federal government agencies. The Government Printing Office
|
|
(GPO) and the National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
|
|
ensure that this information is made widely available to citizens
|
|
through depository programs with research libraries and at-cost
|
|
sales of copies directly to citizens. At the same time,
|
|
commercial publishers such as the Congressional Information
|
|
Service take profitable advantage of the right to repackage and
|
|
add value to this information in print and electronic products
|
|
which they sell to libraries and other businesses.
|
|
The policy proposed here suggests a fundamental change in
|
|
the current practice whereby faculty routinely transfer copyright
|
|
for their scientific and technical journal articles to
|
|
publishers. Instead, widespread adoption of this model policy
|
|
would encourage and support universities and their faculty to
|
|
develop partnerships with publishers like the not-for-profit
|
|
university and association presses which are also committed to
|
|
maintaining a scholarly communication system which provides for
|
|
reasonable-cost access to the published results of all research.
|
|
As pointed out in a recent discussion of scholarly publishing in
|
|
The Chronicle of Higher Education, [7] only the copyright owner
|
|
can decide whether scholarly publications are treated primarily
|
|
as knowledge to be shared or as a commodity to be sold for a
|
|
profit.
|
|
In trade and mass market publishing, such as novels,
|
|
textbooks, and popular magazines, authors recognize the economic
|
|
value of their intellectual property and transfer limited rights
|
|
to publishers so they will earn royalties. In scholarly journal
|
|
publishing, by contrast, authors freely assign their ownership
|
|
rights to publishers. The irony here is that university
|
|
libraries are being forced to pay spiraling subscription costs
|
|
for information created and given away by faculty whose research
|
|
was supported largely by public grants and these same university
|
|
library resources.
|
|
The Copyright Policy Task Force of the Triangle Research
|
|
Libraries Network believes that if many universities adopted the
|
|
model policy, the ultimate result would be a more rational and
|
|
productive worldwide scholarly communication system.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 16 +
|
|
|
|
Notes
|
|
|
|
1. This paper previously appeared in the Newsletter on Serials
|
|
Pricing Issues in numbers 93 and 94 of the 1993 volume. This
|
|
electronic newsletter is archived at LISTSERV@GIBBS.OIT.UNC.EDU.
|
|
|
|
2. Herbert S. White, "Scholarly Publishers and Libraries: A
|
|
Strained Marriage," Scholarly Publishing 19 (April 1988): 127.
|
|
|
|
3. Herbert White, "Scholarly Publication, Academic Libraries, and
|
|
the Assumption That These Processes Are Really Under Management
|
|
Control," College & Research Libraries 54, no. 4 (1993): 293-301.
|
|
|
|
4. Scott Bennett, "Copyright and Innovation in Electronic
|
|
Publishing: A Commentary," The Journal of Academic Librarianship
|
|
19 (May 1993): 87-91.
|
|
|
|
5. Christopher Anderson, "The Rocky Road to a Data Highway,"
|
|
Science 260 (21 May 1993): 1064-65.
|
|
|
|
6. Carlton Rochell, "The Knowledge Business: Economic Issues of
|
|
Access to Bibliographic Information," College & Research
|
|
Libraries 46, no. 1 (1985): 6.
|
|
|
|
7. Scott Bennett and Nina Matheson, "Scholarly Articles: Valuable
|
|
Commodities for Universities," The Chronicle of Higher Education,
|
|
27 May 1992, B1-B3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bibliography
|
|
|
|
Anderson, Christopher. "The Rocky Road to a Data Highway."
|
|
Science 260 (21 May 1993): 1064-65.
|
|
|
|
Barshall, Henry H. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Physics Journals."
|
|
Physics Today 41 (July 1988): 56-59.
|
|
|
|
Bennett, Scott. "Copyright and Innovation in Electronic
|
|
Publishing: A Commentary." The Journal of Academic Librarianship
|
|
19 (May 1993): 87-91.
|
|
|
|
Bennett, Scott, and Nina Matheson. "Scholarly Articles: Valuable
|
|
Commodities for Universities." The Chronicle of Higher
|
|
Education, 27 May 1992, B1-B3.
|
|
|
|
Byrd, Gary D. "An Economic `Commons' Tragedy for Research
|
|
Libraries: Scholarly Journal Publishing and Pricing Trends."
|
|
College & Research Libraries 51, no. 3 (1990): 184-95.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 17 +
|
|
|
|
Carrigan, Dennis P. "Publish or Perish: The Troubled State of
|
|
Scholarly Communication." Scholarly Publishing 22 (April 1991):
|
|
131-42.
|
|
|
|
Feinman, Stephen. "Regulation of the STI Industry: A Historical
|
|
Basis and Some Possibilities." In Information Services:
|
|
Economics, Management and Technology, eds. Robert M. Mason and
|
|
John E. Creps, Jr., 39-62. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1981.
|
|
|
|
Fry, Bernard M., and Herbert S. White. Impact of Economic
|
|
Pressures on American Libraries and Their Decisions Concerning
|
|
Scholarly and Research Journal Acquisition and Retention.
|
|
Washington, DC: National Science Foundation, June 1978. National
|
|
Technical Information Service, PB 283874.
|
|
|
|
Hewitt, Joe A. "Altered States: Evolution or Revolution in
|
|
Journal-Based Communications?" American Libraries 20 (June
|
|
1989): 497-500.
|
|
|
|
Lewis, David W. "Economics of the Scholarly Journal." College &
|
|
Research Libraries 50, no. 6 (1989): 674-88.
|
|
|
|
Okerson, Ann, and Kendon Stubbs. "The Library Doomsday Machine."
|
|
Publishers Weekly, 8 February 1991, 36-37.
|
|
|
|
Patterson, L. Ray, and Stanley W. Lindberg. The Nature of
|
|
Copyright: A Law of Users' Rights. Athens, GA: University of
|
|
Georgia Press, 1991.
|
|
|
|
Price, Derek J. de Solla. Little Science, Big Science. New
|
|
York: Columbia University Press, 1963.
|
|
|
|
Rochell, Carlton. "The Knowledge Business: Economic Issues of
|
|
Access to Bibliographic Information." College & Research
|
|
Libraries 46, no. 1 (1985): 5-12.
|
|
|
|
Strong, William S. The Copyright Book: A Practical Guide, 4th
|
|
ed. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1993.
|
|
|
|
Thatcher, Sanford. "Toward the Year 2001." Scholarly Publishing
|
|
24 (October 1992): 25-37.
|
|
|
|
White, Herbert S. "Scholarly Publishers and Libraries: A
|
|
Strained Marriage." Scholarly Publishing 19 (April 1988):
|
|
125-29.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 18 +
|
|
|
|
White, Herbert S. "The Journal That Ate the Library." Library
|
|
Journal, 113, no. 9 (15 May 1988): 62-63.
|
|
|
|
White, Herbert S. "Librarians, Journal Publishers and Scholarly
|
|
Information: Whose Leaky Boat is Sinking?" Logos 1, no. 4 (1990):
|
|
18-23.
|
|
|
|
White, Herbert. "Scholarly Publication, Academic Libraries, and
|
|
the Assumption That These Processes Are Really Under Management
|
|
Control." College & Research Libraries 54, no. 4 (1993):
|
|
293-301.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appendix A. Model University Policy Regarding Faculty
|
|
Publication in Scientific and Technical Scholarly Journals
|
|
|
|
Preamble
|
|
|
|
The Constitutional purpose of copyright is "to promote the
|
|
Progress of Science and useful Arts by securing for limited Times
|
|
to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective
|
|
Writings and Discoveries" (Article I, section 8, clause 8).
|
|
Thus, from the beginning U.S. copyright legislation has had the
|
|
complementary purposes of protecting the intellectual property of
|
|
authors and of promoting widespread access to useful information.
|
|
The following policy addresses the need to maintain a balance
|
|
between scholars' rights as authors and a fundamental mission of
|
|
the modern university; that is, to promote the free exchange of
|
|
ideas and research results. To this end, this university will
|
|
work to strengthen already-existing university and scholarly
|
|
society or association publishing enterprises whose journal
|
|
subscription prices are rationally related to the actual costs of
|
|
journal publication. This university will also work with
|
|
scholarly associations and research libraries to provide support
|
|
services that facilitate the widespread dissemination of faculty
|
|
research results.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 19 +
|
|
|
|
The Policy
|
|
|
|
As a non-profit institution which relies heavily on government
|
|
and foundation grants to support its research activities, this
|
|
university asks its faculty to publish their scientific and
|
|
technical research results in journals supported by universities,
|
|
scholarly associations, or other organizations sharing the
|
|
mission to promote widespread, reasonable-cost access to research
|
|
information. Where this is not possible, faculty should use the
|
|
model "Authorization to Publish" form below to ensure that
|
|
control of copyright in the published results of their university
|
|
research remains within the academic research community.
|
|
Where publishers' pricing practices would restrict
|
|
widespread access to research results, individual retention of
|
|
copyright to scientific and technical journal articles will help
|
|
to ensure that faculty maintain their rights, individually or
|
|
collectively, to disseminate this information, as appropriate, to
|
|
colleagues, students and the public at large using existing and
|
|
emerging print and electronic technologies. Current copyright
|
|
law specifically gives the owner the right to reproduce,
|
|
distribute, prepare derivative versions, and to perform or
|
|
display articles or other works.
|
|
The model "Authorization to Publish" form stipulates that
|
|
the article will be published with a statement on the first page
|
|
notifying readers that copyright remains with the author(s) and
|
|
giving permission for the noncommercial reproduction of the
|
|
article for educational or research purposes. Thus, only
|
|
commercial reproduction beyond initial publication in the journal
|
|
would require that the author(s) be contacted directly for
|
|
permission. Faculty may also want to consider negotiating a
|
|
contract which gives the publisher a nonexclusive right to sell
|
|
licenses to reproduce the article at agreed-upon reasonable rates
|
|
(for instance, to commercial copy services which reproduce
|
|
articles for use in university "course packs").
|
|
|
|
+ Page 20 +
|
|
|
|
Model "Authorization to Publish" Form
|
|
|
|
A major mission of _________________________________ (name of the
|
|
university) is to provide for the creation and dissemination of
|
|
new knowledge. To promote the widest possible dissemination of
|
|
research results, the faculty employees of this University are
|
|
encouraged to publish in journals supported by organizations
|
|
having the mission to support widespread reasonable-cost access
|
|
to research results. Where this is not possible, faculty are
|
|
asked to retain individual copyright in the scientific and
|
|
technical scholarly journal articles produced while conducting
|
|
university research. Therefore,
|
|
|
|
_________________________________________________________________
|
|
[hereinafter called the Author(s)] grants to
|
|
|
|
_________________________________________________________________
|
|
[hereinafter called the Publisher] the right to publish the
|
|
article provisionally entitled
|
|
|
|
_________________________________________________________________
|
|
[hereinafter called the Article] in the following
|
|
print/electronic journal:
|
|
|
|
This authorization does not transfer to the Publisher copyright
|
|
in the Article, nor the right to grant or deny permission for the
|
|
reproduction of the Article in other forms, with the exception of
|
|
limited reproduction by indexing and abstracting services. This
|
|
Authorization takes effect only upon the acceptance by the
|
|
Publisher of the Article for publication in the journal indicated
|
|
above. If the Article is not accepted for publication, no
|
|
authorization of the Publisher shall have been made.
|
|
The Author(s) retain(s) all title, interest, and rights in
|
|
the Article, including but not limited to the rights to grant or
|
|
deny permission for further reproduction of the published
|
|
Article, to use material from the Article in subsequent works, to
|
|
redistribute the Article by electronic means, to display the work
|
|
publicly, to procure registration of copyright, and to secure
|
|
copyright in any other country.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 21 +
|
|
|
|
Warranties
|
|
|
|
The Author(s) warrant(s) that he/she/they is/are the sole
|
|
author(s) and proprietor(s) of the Article, that the Article does
|
|
not contain any libelous or unlawful material, that it does not
|
|
infringe upon the rights of others, and that its contents are
|
|
original to the Author(s) and have not been submitted for
|
|
publication in another journal. If the Article contains
|
|
significant excerpts from other copyrighted materials, the
|
|
Author(s) warrant(s) that written permission from the copyright
|
|
holder has been obtained and proper credit has been given in the
|
|
Article.
|
|
The following notice shall appear, as a condition of
|
|
publication of the Article, as a footnote on the first page of
|
|
the Article as distributed by the Publisher:
|
|
|
|
"Copyright to this work is retained by the author(s).
|
|
Permission is granted for the noncommercial reproduction of
|
|
the complete work for educational or research purposes, and
|
|
for the use of figures, tables and short quotes from this
|
|
work in other books or journals, provided a full
|
|
bibliographic citation is given to the original source of
|
|
the material."
|
|
|
|
Date: ________________________
|
|
|
|
Signature(s) of Author(s): _____________________________________
|
|
|
|
Name(s) of Author(s):________________________________________
|
|
|
|
Authorizing signature for the Publisher:
|
|
_________________________
|
|
|
|
+ Page 22 +
|
|
|
|
Appendix. Advice to Authors
|
|
|
|
The following guidelines are intended to aid faculty in choosing
|
|
an appropriate scholarly journal publisher and in negotiating
|
|
copyright and licensing agreements which insure the widest
|
|
possible dissemination of their scholarship and research results
|
|
at reasonable costs.
|
|
|
|
1. Choosing a scholarly journal publisher and submitting
|
|
an article for publication:
|
|
In evaluating any potential journal for the
|
|
publication of an original article, faculty should
|
|
consider the publisher's policy regarding the
|
|
reproduction of articles for education or scholarly
|
|
purposes by students, faculty, and libraries.
|
|
Publication with university publishers or other
|
|
not-for-profit scholarly associations will ensure that
|
|
the university community can promote widespread access
|
|
to these research results at reasonable cost.
|
|
Publication via a national or international public
|
|
online computer network is encouraged when this
|
|
alternative is available.
|
|
Although not required to protect copyright,
|
|
faculty should never submit an article for publication
|
|
to a scholarly journal without including a "notice of
|
|
copyright" on the title page (e.g., 1992 J.Q. Faculty).
|
|
|
|
2. The rights that authors retain by not assigning
|
|
copyright in their scholarly journal articles to
|
|
profit-driven publishers include:
|
|
|
|
o The right to reproduce the work, to authorize
|
|
the reproduction of the work, or to exclude
|
|
others from reproducing the work.
|
|
|
|
o The right to distribute or authorize the
|
|
distribution of the work by sale, rental,
|
|
lease, or lending.
|
|
|
|
o The right to prepare or authorize the
|
|
preparation of derivative works (such as
|
|
translations, new editions, abridgements,
|
|
etc.) of the work.
|
|
|
|
o The right to present or "perform" the work
|
|
publicly in person or through the mass media.
|
|
|
|
o The right to display the work publicly
|
|
through new technological methods.
|
|
|
|
+ Page 23 +
|
|
|
|
3. The responsibilities authors and their supporting
|
|
institutions assume by not assigning copyright in their
|
|
scholarly journal articles to profit-driven publishers
|
|
include:
|
|
|
|
o The responsibility to seek not only the most
|
|
prestigious journals for publication of
|
|
articles, but also those which will assure
|
|
their widespread availability to other
|
|
scholars and students at a reasonable cost.
|
|
|
|
o The responsibility to learn more about our
|
|
current system of scholarly communication
|
|
through journals and the role copyright
|
|
plays in this system.
|
|
|
|
o The responsibility to participate actively in
|
|
campus, national, and international
|
|
committees, discussion groups, and forums
|
|
where changes in our current system of
|
|
scholarly communication are being debated.
|
|
|
|
o The responsibility to support nascent efforts
|
|
among university presses and other campus
|
|
agencies to create new outlets for scholarly
|
|
research that promote widespread access
|
|
to these resources among university scholars
|
|
worldwide.
|
|
|
|
o Where not already assigned by license to a
|
|
publisher, the responsibility to respond
|
|
promptly to requests to resell articles for
|
|
commercial purposes (noncommercial
|
|
reproduction would be automatically permitted
|
|
by the notice printed or electronically
|
|
displayed on the first page of the article).
|
|
|
|
+ Page 24 +
|
|
|
|
About the Authors
|
|
|
|
Members of the TRLN Copyright Policy Task Force:
|
|
|
|
Gary D. Byrd, Health Sciences Library, University of North
|
|
Carolina at Chapel Hill.
|
|
|
|
Jerry D. Campbell, Perkins Library, Duke University.
|
|
|
|
Stephen A. Cohn, Duke University Press.
|
|
|
|
Jerry M. Davis, Marine, Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences,
|
|
North Carolina State University.
|
|
|
|
Paul Garwig, Textiles Library, North Carolina State
|
|
University.
|
|
|
|
Laura N. Gasaway, Law Library, University of North Carolina
|
|
at Chapel Hill.
|
|
|
|
Joe A. Hewitt, Davis Library, University of North Carolina
|
|
at Chapel Hill.
|
|
|
|
Connie K. McCarthy, Perkins Library, Duke University.
|
|
|
|
C. David Perry, University of North Carolina Press.
|
|
|
|
Ross Whetten, Forestry, North Carolina State University.
|
|
|
|
Please address comments or questions to:
|
|
|
|
Gary Byrd
|
|
Health Sciences Library
|
|
CB #7585, UNC-CH,
|
|
Chapel Hill, N.C. 27599
|
|
Phone: 919-966-2111
|
|
FAX: 919-966-1029
|
|
E-Mail: BYRDMED@MED.UNC.EDU
|
|
|
|
+ Page 25 +
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review is an electronic
|
|
journal that is distributed on BITNET, Internet, and other
|
|
computer networks. There is no subscription fee.
|
|
To subscribe, send an e-mail message to LISTSERV@UHUPVM1
|
|
(BITNET) or LISTSERV@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU (Internet) that says:
|
|
SUBSCRIBE PACS-P First Name Last Name. PACS-P subscribers also
|
|
receive three electronic newsletters: Current Cites, LITA
|
|
Newsletter, and Public-Access Computer Systems News.
|
|
This article is Copyright (C) 1993 by Gary D. Byrd, Jerry D.
|
|
Campbell, Stephen A. Cohn, Jerry M. Davis, Paul Garwig, Laura N.
|
|
Gasaway, Joe A. Hewitt, Connie K. McCarthy, C. David Perry, and
|
|
Ross Whetten. All Rights Reserved.
|
|
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review is Copyright (C)
|
|
1993 by the University Libraries, University of Houston. All
|
|
Rights Reserved.
|
|
Copyright to this work is retained by the author(s).
|
|
Permission is granted for the noncommercial reproduction of the
|
|
complete work for educational or research purposes, and for the
|
|
use of figures, tables and short quotes from this work in other
|
|
books or journals, provided a full bibliographic citation is
|
|
given to the original source of the material.
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|