Re: [CNI-COPYRIGHT] Re: "Do not sell to schools" and copyright

See the Copyright Use and Ownership Policy of the University of North Carolina at
http://www.northcarolina.edu/content.php/legal/policymanual/contents.htm?sub menu=50

In particular, see the "shop right" as defined in the policy -

Peggy

-- 
Peggy E. Hoon
Scholarly Communication Librarian
North Carolina State University Libraries
Raleigh, NC  27695-7111
919.513.2045
919.513.3553 (fax)
peggy_hoon[_at_]ncsu.edu



> From: "Laurie Urquiaga" <Urquiagal[_at_]lawgate.byu.edu>

> Reply-To: "CNI-COPYRIGHT Mail List" <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>

> Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 18:44:23 -0500

> To: "CNI-COPYRIGHT Mail List" <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>

> Subject: [CNI-COPYRIGHT]  Re: "Do not sell to schools" and copyright

> 

>> Melissa Belvadi:
>> But in the last 10-15 years, some for-profit publishers of scholarly
>> journals have gotten, well to speak subjectively, greedy, and increased
>> institutional pricing far above the inflation rate, year after year after
>> year, causing libraries with modest-to-none budget increases to face a
>> genuine crisis. (Everyone on this list knows already about the monopoly
>> pricing power inherent in copyright law; that power exists to the hilt
>> in the domain of scholarly publishing.)


> 

> 

> Nancy Willard:

> It seems to me that institutions of higher education are the ones that give

> these scholarly publications this power and maybe it might be time to take

> some power back.

> 

> 

> Laurie Urquiaga:

> I think that the work for hire doctrine could actually provide some solution

> to this conundrum, but only if the various campus constitutencies get over

> their 'knee-jerk' responses to it.  What if all universities asserted that

> faculty work was work for hire, but then returned the copyright to the

> individual faculty members in return for irrevocable, non-exclusive licenses

> to use/publish the work on campus for academic purposes (perhaps after a

> 1-year delay)?  The exchange would be for consideration, so I think the

> irrevocable nature of the license would be binding.  The individual faculty

> member would then be able to transfer the copyright to a publisher, if that

> were required -- but the institution would still have the right to use it and

> even put it on a campus webserver after publication.  I can see the publishers

> squawking a bit, but if all universities did this together, they wouldn't have

> much choice but to acceed to the changed reality.  It might kill the reprint

> market (not a bad thing, imo), but probably wouldn't affect up-front

> subscription purchases unless publishers raised prices to the point that

> people decided to wait a year for the institutional copy to be made available.

> I think that the resulting downward pressure would counteract monopolistic

> rent-seeking.  What do you all think?

> 

> Laureen C. Urquiaga

> Associate Library Director for Access Services

> Law School Copyright Coordinator

> 

> urquiagal[_at_]lawgate.byu.edu

> 

> 

> 

> #############################################################

> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to

> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.

> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org>

> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org>

> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org>

> Send administrative queries to  <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>

> 

> Vist the e-mail list web archive at

> <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>

> 

>