Re: Online and Out of Print

> Indeed, a joint copyright arrangement would be more equitable for the
> author with respect to the unforseen future applications of information
> technology. However, would this not complicate the granting of reprint
> permission if dual consent was required for every request (i.e. the
> acquiescence of BOTH the author and publisher)? Additionally, how
> would such joint ownership be expressed, practically speaking, in the
> language of the copyright agreement without being uselessly vague ?
>
> Thomas J. Shelford
> Regional Sales Office - Elsevier Science Inc.

> Reference contributions from Chris Zielinski and Peter Goldie - would not
> several problems (typically potential problems rather than actual!) be
> solved if the author had joint copyright with the publisher? That would
> allow the author to share in unforeseen exploitation through other media
> and put the author in a position to overcome misdemeanours in the 'out of
> print' area.
>
> At this point in time it could be genuinely advantageous to both sides
> since it would avoid the necessity to attempt to have the contract cover
> technical and commercial developments - which noone can forecast
> reasonably for the next few years.
>
> Shared copyright would not necessarily imply shared royalty payments;
> but it would imply the author's right to be consulted and to agree.
>
> * John Sumsion
> * Senior Fellow, Dept. of Information and Library Studies,
> * Loughborough University

As a former long-time publisher, I find the concept of jointly-held copyright as unappealing as, say, a co-publication where the publisher designation is shared - it is not a good solution for those (librarians, multimedia producers, etc.) who want to make subsequent arrangements with the rightsholder.

As a representative of authors' groups, I can't understand why in the analogue world rights to works that have gone out of print generally revert to the author while in the digital world they should be shared.

In the discussion in the liblicense-l and cni-copyright lists, there was no general term proposed for the duration of time a work should be considered in print . We are currently advising authors who have their works published in electronic form to insert a default clause into their contracts that stipulates a six-month in-print period, with rights reverting to the author subsequently. Individual contracts covering specific kinds of exploitation needs may of course differ. In particular, the longer marketing cycles for CD-ROM/DVD might require longer in-print terms. It is in any case suggested that the issue should be confronted in all contracts and licenses between creators and publishers/producers.

Chris Zielinski

Chris Zielinski, Secretary General
ALCS, Isis House
74 New Oxford Street, London, WC1A 1EF
Tel: +44 (0)171 255 2034 Fax: +44 (0)171 323 0486 <chris.zielinski[_at_]alcs.co.uk> Received on Tue Apr 01 1997 - 17:59:53 GMT