Re: Snooze/lose (Was: Academics and coursepacks)

On Fri, 4 Sep 1998, Timothy Arnold-Moore <tja[_at_]mds.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
>
> I don't think there is much distinction between the right to remove
> from publication and the right to limit or prevent further publication.
> Both hamper access to "public" material, or, when they are not available,
> lead to the problem which you are addressing. It is simply a matter of
> degree.
>
> Copyright, at least in Anglo Saxon regimes is an impoverished tool for
> protecting reputation. Rather than extending it to do a task it was
> never designed to do, I much prefer a tool designed for the task.

I agree with much of Timothy Arnold-Moore's posting re any published author's views at any given time and the obligation on said author to state and publish changes in those views, thus obliging the scholar who follows to track those changes, etc. Further, while I agree with his noting little distinction between "remov[ing] from publication" and "limit[ing] or prevent[ing] further publication", that was not the distinction I was attempting to make. I postulated a situation where an author had already published and subsequently changed views, and so did not want to see the earlier work REPRINTED. This would not be an effort "for protecting reputation", as the original work would still exist and be available. However, the author could exercise a limit on the promulgation of the earlier work beyond the existing edition(s).

Cheers,

Bernard Katz, Head, Special Collections and Library Development McLaughlin Library, University of Guelph, Guelph ON Canada N1G 2W1

   and Chair, Ontario Library Association Copyright Action Committee bkatz[_at_]uoguelph.ca // (519) 824-4120 X2089 // FAX: (519) 824-6931 Received on Thu Sep 10 1998 - 00:01:10 GMT