Re: SCIENCE TODAY?

From: Dan L Burk <BURKDANL[_at_]shu.edu>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 21:49:58 -0500

On 02/22/99, Albert Henderson <noblestation[_at_]compuserve.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, Shelly Warwick <swarwick[_at_]sprynet.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm confused. If a work is covered by copyright as soon as its
> > fixed, then the author, and copyright holder, is whoever is
> > stated as the author in the fixed form. If this is so, why would
> > the multiple authors of a scientific paper not each be considered
> > an author for copyright purposes, unless the copyright was
> > transferred to someone else, say the publisher where the article
> > appeared.
>
> In science and medicine it is not uncommon for an unnammed
> writer to prepare an article for presentation. My understanding
> is that this writer makes no claim on copyright which is
> normally transferred "as a work made for hire" to the publisher.

1. Speaking as an author on several scientific articles, I have never encountered or heard of such a practice.
2. If a writer is a statutory author, copyright vests whether a claim is made or not.
3. If the writer is an employee of the publisher such that the work is a work made for hire, there is no transfer; the publisher IS the author. If the writer is not an employee, the copyright can be transferred but it is NOT a work made for hire (except in a situation that probably does not apply here, pursuant to a written agreement, when the work falls into certain statutorily ennumerated categories).

   ---

Dan L. Burk
Seton Hall University
burkdanl[_at_]shu.edu

---

Received on Wed Feb 24 1999 - 02:59:59 GMT