On 9/25/98, Tim Arnold-Moore <tja[_at_]mds.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
>
> Not being an expert in US anti-trust law, I fail to see how one could
> argue that the activities of the university differ from those of the
> publisher. If it is legal for a publisher to refuse to publish unless
> copyright is assigned (if it is) but illegal for an employer of authors
> to refuse to allow their employees to publish unless copyright is
> retained? Is there some definitional point I'm missing?
I guess I should have been more specific. My remark respecting potential antitrust liability was aimed not so much at the relation between the authors and their universities (although I think there is a weaker argument there as well) as it was to the article's proposed agreeement between all universites to set this policy together. I am no hotshot on this area of law either, but my intial feeling was that it looked a bit like a combination in restraint of the publisher's trade. Now, I am also no big supporter of protecting a publisher's clout, but it struck me that this arrangement might potentially create several causes of action for them.
James
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:32 GMT