3 ms·
This is, I think, misleading. There is nothing unusual about IEEE copyright policies. Requiring copyright assignment is standard procedure for academic journals
by ggchappell 15y ago
This is, I think, misleading. There is nothing unusual about IEEE copyright policies. Requiring copyright assignment is standard procedure for academic journals, with exceptions made for U.S. govt. works. As noted in the last paragraph, the American Mathematical Society bucks the trend (they "suggest", rather than require, copyright assignment), but they are a rarity.
Other than that, we have one person (the IEEE Intellectual Property Rights Manager) who misunderstands the law and does not behave in a very friendly manner.
The above do not strike me as sufficient reasons for singling out the IEEE for blacklisting. If you want, blacklist everyone who puts publicly funded research behind paywalls. Or blacklist no one. But just the IEEE? That doesn't make sense.
- wnight 15y agoBlacklist anyone who stands up for an exploitative policy. If the others wise up soon enough they may never get called on it.
- loup-vaillant 15y agoIn other words, hit the nail that stands out. This feels a bit totalitarian, but it might just work.
- wnight 15y agoYou need to know why "they" are doing "it". But yeah, if "it" is something "they" can afford to stop, then yes. IEEE is famous enough it would survive even if this was a small market negative. It's more problematic with low-end products made by child labor for instance. If they couldn't compete with other child-labor products they'd go out of business. There you need to do a more comprehensive blacklist or you're just swapping the devil you know for the ones you don't.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- kragen 15y agoI believe Dan is blacklisting just the IEEE because no other publisher has yet refused to publish a paper of his on the grounds that it was in the public domain. I don't know how many publishers he has submitted public-domain papers to, but I imagine it's more than two.