Re: Garfield: "Acknowledged Self-Archiving is Not Prior Publication"

In-Reply-To: <3D7E5400.48C6C705[_at_]RealMeasures.dyndns.org>
> Stevan Harnad wrote:
> >
> > (2) protecting copyright-holders from users who would make corrupted
> > copies of their texts (including copies in which someone else is
> > listed as the author). Almost all authors still want protection
> > from the latter.
> What on earth can it mean, protect the "textual integrity"
> of a work that is flexible, shared, and can be parsed?

Seth Johnson <seth.johnson[_at_]RealMeasures.dyndns.org> replied:  

> I don't get it. I can't.

I'm guessing you passed through the education system of the USA.

In all countries bar the USA (and perhaps those that were the, er, benefactors of the Caribbean Basin Initiative) authors have the "moral right of integrity". This means, translating into a US cultural context, the right to sue anyone who produces a distorted version of their work.

This is different from any US recourse that may be claimed to be equivalent. All the court has to find is one matter of fact, plus (in some jurisdictions) that the distortion is "contrary to the honour or integrity" of the the author (using the Berne Convention language). In most, the fact that it's distorted is likely to be taken as implying necessarily that it's "contrary to..."

www.holderness.eu.com Received on Fri Sep 13 2002 - 19:43:10 GMT