3 ms·
> changing the terms to retain copyright), signed it and sent it back (no journal ever complained, and all his papers are available as PDFs online). Assuming t
by judge2020 5y ago
> changing the terms to retain copyright), signed it and sent it back (no journal ever complained, and all his papers are available as PDFs online).
Assuming the journals signed it first, this is most likely illegal since they didn’t know they were signing under the different terms. If they sign it after the professor signs it, they technically have the duty to confirm the language is the same, but it still might be seen as a deceptive practice on the professor’s part.
- dekhn 5y agoI had this discussion with the professor in question. He had already consulted with his IP lawyers. As you say, they technically have the duty to confirm the language is the same, but we know they didn't because the paper was published with their copyright attached. I think he was trying to push the issue, gently, and hoped some published would make a stink.
- tomcam 5y agoContracts are amended all the time in exactly this method. That’s how contracts work (IANAL so maybe I’ve missed something, but I was taught this by lawyer left)
- sebzim4500 5y agoSurely you are supposed to tell the other person if you are changing the contract though? Not a lawyer, but it's hard for me to believe that tricking someone into signing the wrong thing is an effective legal strategy.
- hackmiester 5y agoIf you just signed it, that would be indicating you accept it with no changes. There is no reason to send it back aside from redlining something. So sending a new contract is itself the indication that it has been redlined.