Re: copyright expiration as a spur to creativity

On 9/18/98, Kerry L. Konrad <k_konrad[_at_]stblaw.com> wrote:
>
> ... she could choose to disseminate her work only to those who
> agreed not to redistribute it further, and she could place appropriate
> legends on the work sufficient to give notice to any subsequent
> acquiror of the work that it is subject to such a contractual
> restriction.

As a matter of fact, this sort of distribution goes on all the time under the control of editors. We call it peer review. Referees are obligated by their agreement to participate -- no boilerplate in evidence -- not to make and distribute copies or otherwise use the unpublished material. Communications are "privileged" starting with the author's submission.

Privacy is a major concern of authors, since so much credit is attached to the first publication of discovery. All of science would crumble if trust were gone. I don't know of any examples of betrayal although I wouldn't dispute that some authors have raised accusations of plagiarism.

STEALING INTO PRINT by M C LaFollette (U. Calif Press, 1992) covers this and other misconduct connected with scientific publishing. I recommend it.

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY <70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com> Received on Thu Sep 24 1998 - 02:02:09 GMT