[cc-community] Copyrights

Robert Atwood lists at atwood.org.uk
Tue May 6 07:44:53 EDT 2008


Andrew Rens wrote:
> 2008/5/6 Robert Atwood (lists) <lists at atwood.org.uk>:
> 
>> Andrew Rens wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> Self plagiarism is a deeply incoherent idea born from the deep anxieties
>>> generated by  Romantic author mythology.
>>>
>>> On a practical level if you quote your previous academic work in a new
>>> academic work then you should
>>> provide references as a courtesy to your readers.
>> I'd put it a bit 'more' that courtesy to readers, in that not providing
>> the reference woudl be unacceptable in a way that's beyond mere
>> 'discourtesy' .
> 
> 
> Robert, perhaps that is a cultural difference. In my culture courtesy is
> taken
> rather seriously.

Well , lets say that the other reasons are in addition to courtesy, 
although not more important than


> 
> I
>> Of course if the works in question are not all single-author works, the
>> discussion of whter it's 'self-plagarism' doesn't apply, of course you
>> could plagarise your prior co-authors and they shoudl be rightly upset
>> if you did so!
> 
> 
> That assumes that the 'contribution' of each person is somehow a discrete
> part
> which can be identified as the contribution of that person which can or
> should be identified
> as that person's contributions. Most works of multiple authorship aren't
> like that.
> One is after all quoting oneself as well as others.

Huh? No ... Thats not what I assume ..  I rather mean that I assume that 
_all_ authors contributed to _each_ part of the whole, so no part can be 
quoted without giving credit to all authors ( which I think should apply 
to cc-by collaborative works too!) Which is what I think you are saying 
too.

> 
> But of course if one makes out that one is the sole author of a particular
> long
> string of words that might amount to some kind of academic sin, whether
> plagiarism or
> not.

Also .. a discourtesy !

 > most journals just require a
>> copyright transfer and that's that.
> 
> 
> Publish in an open access journal.

Hoepfuly in the future 'most' will be that way :-) Having not had any 
'single author' publications I am afraid the choice has not so far been 
  mine alone for such things and in my field it seem likely to remain so.
However, really copyright transfer is simply not the big deal for that 
kind of work, also it seems a separate issue from open-access; an 
open-acces could still ask for copyright transfer. Indeed if there were 
some probability that the copyright i.e. in this case , open-access 
license terms , would need to be defended legally , it might be 
preferable to transfer copyright to an organization with some resources 
to undertake such action!

The main attraction of  open access  in my opinion is so that readers 
may access the work more easily. i.e. Transferring copyright to an open 
access forum would seem preferable to non-transfer to a non-open-access; 
in the latter case I suppose I would be free to also stick it up on my 
own website but nobody would actually read it there! There isn't really 
any after-market as there is for short stories, software,  etc. as far 
as I am aware. Under open-access e.g. cc-by ,  I still would have the 
ability to use materials myself right?













More information about the cc-community mailing list