6 ms·

Also, the journal publisher definitely owns the page layout, and can potentially claim copyright to the final text, since its editors contributed to it during t

Also, the journal publisher definitely owns the page layout, and can potentially claim copyright to the final text, since its editors contributed to it during the review process.

kbutler 13y ago
The publisher "owns" the layout only for the creative expression within the page layout. There's not likely to be much copyrightable expression within a page layout. And infringement of that expression by republishing the article is likely to meet the criteria for fair use. Editorial contributions are also unlikely to rise to the measure of a separately copyrightable work. In the case of scientific articles, joint authorship between contributing scientists is common, but the editors of the journal are never (rarely?) cited as authors. Occasionally, a reviewer will make substantive contributions to the science and join as a co-author. It seems pretty safe to say that if the editor is not listed as a co-author of the paper, neither the author(s) nor the editor(s) consider it a "joint work". See also http://lottfischer.com/general.php?category=Resources&subhead=Articles&headline=+When+does+an+Editor%E2%80%99s+input+create+a+Joint+Work+of+Authorship http://lottfischer.com/general.php?category=Resources&subhea... for a discussion of when the editing could arise (basically, if both the author and the editor intend for it to be a work of joint authorship.)
- simonster 13y ago
  I don't know enough about the relevant case law to tell you for certain that the layout is copyrightable, but my gut feeling is that it is, since that bar is pretty low and copying the publisher's PDF seems kind of analogous to copying a website's HTML. Fair use may not be applicable here, since even though the layout is a small proportion of the total work, it has value independent of the text: People might spend money (or persuade their university to spend money) to buy the publisher's PDF even if the manuscript were available for free. Given your link I agree that the review process is unlikely to give the publisher any claim to the text itself. I do know that most author agreements for non-open access journals allow authors to publish the manuscript on their personal website and in repositories (sometimes pre-review, sometimes post-review), but most do not allow authors to publish the publisher's PDF, which suggests that the publishers believe they have some kind of ownership over the latter. (In practice many people post the publisher's PDF articles on their websites and no one complains, although repositories like PubMed Central contain only manuscripts from these journals.) The AAAS author agreement actually explicitly allows authors to legally publish the peer reviewed manuscript on their websites as soon as it is published, which raises the question of why the authors of these studies didn't just do that.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
>editors contributed to it during the review process. Who are themselves gov't employees on salary at universities and national labs.

Also, the journal publisher definitely owns the page layout, and can potentially claim copyright to the final text, since its editors contributed to it during the review process.

kbutler 13y ago

The publisher "owns" the layout only for the creative expression within the page layout. There's not likely to be much copyrightable expression within a page layout. And infringement of that expression by republishing the article is likely to meet the criteria for fair use. Editorial contributions are also unlikely to rise to the measure of a separately copyrightable work. In the case of scientific articles, joint authorship between contributing scientists is common, but the editors of the journal are never (rarely?) cited as authors. Occasionally, a reviewer will make substantive contributions to the science and join as a co-author. It seems pretty safe to say that if the editor is not listed as a co-author of the paper, neither the author(s) nor the editor(s) consider it a "joint work". See also http://lottfischer.com/general.php?category=Resources&subhead=Articles&headline=+When+does+an+Editor%E2%80%99s+input+create+a+Joint+Work+of+Authorship http://lottfischer.com/general.php?category=Resources&subhea... for a discussion of when the editing could arise (basically, if both the author and the editor intend for it to be a work of joint authorship.)

simonster 13y ago
I don't know enough about the relevant case law to tell you for certain that the layout is copyrightable, but my gut feeling is that it is, since that bar is pretty low and copying the publisher's PDF seems kind of analogous to copying a website's HTML. Fair use may not be applicable here, since even though the layout is a small proportion of the total work, it has value independent of the text: People might spend money (or persuade their university to spend money) to buy the publisher's PDF even if the manuscript were available for free. Given your link I agree that the review process is unlikely to give the publisher any claim to the text itself. I do know that most author agreements for non-open access journals allow authors to publish the manuscript on their personal website and in repositories (sometimes pre-review, sometimes post-review), but most do not allow authors to publish the publisher's PDF, which suggests that the publishers believe they have some kind of ownership over the latter. (In practice many people post the publisher's PDF articles on their websites and no one complains, although repositories like PubMed Central contain only manuscripts from these journals.) The AAAS author agreement actually explicitly allows authors to legally publish the peer reviewed manuscript on their websites as soon as it is published, which raises the question of why the authors of these studies didn't just do that.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

>editors contributed to it during the review process. Who are themselves gov't employees on salary at universities and national labs.