There are two issues that I would like to see discussed. The first concerns emended version of published works placed on web servers by the authors. When we place research articles on my web site we almost invariably supplement the original work. Additions have included color versions of figures, new figures, active links either to other work, or to subsequent research (forward citations), text corrections, short annotations, QuickTime movies, expanded methods sections, and major text additions and revisions to the results and discussion sections (the latter marked within brackets) see http://www.nervenet.org/main/papers.html).
I consider all of these emended publications as 2nd editions. Copyright belongs to me and my coauthors. Such 2nd editions obviously complicate the citation of work, but they also revitalize research publications that would otherwise be moribund. There are plenty of problmes with such second editions, but I do think that the benefits outweight potential problems and abuses. In a recent Springer Verlag copyright transfer agreement for a review I had to strike out an outrageous clause that would have ceded copyright of "all subsequent editions" to the publisher. Second: Producing html code can be quite involved and obviously adds enormous value to a work. When my coauthors or I generate html code for our published work could this in itself be copyrighted as an html edition? Are there any precedents? This may be another instance in which it bcomes important to strike out offensive clauses in copyright transfer agreements. Rob Robert W. Williams Center for Neuroscience Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology University of Tennessee 855 Monroe Avenue Memphis TN 38163 TEL (901) 448-7018, or 7050, 7557 FAX ...-7193 EMAIL: rwill...@nb.utmem.edu http://nervenet.org/