Re: transfer of c. in conference proceedings

Lesley Ellen Harris <lesley[_at_]copyrightlaws.com> wrote:
>
> On July 30, 1998, Dan L. Burk <burkdanl[_at_]shu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On 07/28/98, Angela Putney <aputney[_at_]aip.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 07/27/98, Stephen Childe <s.childe[_at_]plymouth.ac.uk> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It is becoming increasingly common for the organisers of academic
> > > > conferences to insist on the authors of submitted papers signing a
> > > > form to transfer their copyright to the organiser or the organising
> > > > institution or publisher.
> > >
> > [snip]
> > >
> > > In Physics and Astronomy conference proceedings, the publishers (that
> > > I am aware of) require a transfer of copyright agreement. They claim
> > > they need this in order to be able to properly publish and distribute
> > > the proceedings (they need some form of rights to publish it in any
> > > case).
> >
> > Well, yes, but the agreement need only tranfer a non-exclusive right
> > to publish the paper. In fact, you might be able to infer such a
> > right from the fact that the author presented the paper at the
> > conference, without a written agreement. This doesn't necessitate
> > transfer of all rights.
> >
> > > If there are any infringements, they can fight for the author.
> >
> > With statutory damages and attorney's fees, the author can probably
> > fight for herself. The real value here may be in detecting, rather than
> > enforcing, the copyright -- a publisher working in the subject matter
> > area may be more likely to detect infringements than the author would
> > be. I emphasize *may.*
> >
> > > They can also deal with requests for re-printing (the publisher is
> > > usually easier to find years later than the author).
> >
> > This is also a dubious assumption. I have watched several smaller
> > scientific publishing houses go out of business, which makes the
> > copyright holder *really* hard to find.
> >
> > > They can also re-print the proceedings if they have copyright (I could
> > > imagine a one-time use consent to publish being offered which would
> > > disallow this).
> >
> > This could also be dealt with by a more limited rights transfer, even a
> > non-exclusive rights transfer.
> >
> > > (This is what I am told at least).
> >
> > I think you (like the rest of us) have been told some convenient
> > justifications by publishers.
> >
> > I suspect the real reason is that conference proceedings don't tend to
> > sell very many copies, so that the publisher feels it needs the ability
> > to exploit the work in ancillary or secondary markets in order to make
> > a profit. Besides being the real reason, this might actually be a
> > persuasive reason if the publisher would admit it.
>
> I would also suggest that academics and others exclude electronic
> rights from any license; otherwise, papers may appear on various Web
> sites without approval of the author.

This is not necessarily always a good idea. I would expect posting of proceedings (or excerpts from them) on a website nowadays to be part of "best practice" conference organisation and if I were presenting a paper at the conference would almost certainly want my paper to be posted. But it should be expressly stated in the licence.

-- 
Edward Barrow
edward[_at_]plato32.demon.co.uk