If the author's employment contract states that their employer (the University) reserves non-commercial distribution rights then that author can not sign away those rights to a publisher (without the agreement of the University).
In my opinion I would rather the IPR were held by the institution - who paid for the research, facilities & support - rather than with the publisher. If not for any other reason than an institution will rarely hold the same kind of monopoly as the big publishers. All the best, Tim. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fytton Rowland" <j.f.rowl...@lboro.ac.uk> To: <american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 3:52 PM Subject: Re: Draft Policy for Self-Archiving University Research Output > Um - before you can have a "postprint" you must have published the paper > somewhere. In many (most?) cases you will have transferred the copyright to > the journal. So how can the University then assert its ownership of a > copyright that you, the individual academic, have already given away in the > belief that it was yours to give? > > Fytton Rowland. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Picciotto, Sol" <s.piccio...@lancaster.ac.uk> > To: <american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org> > Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 1:57 PM > Subject: Re: Draft Policy for Self-Archiving University Research Output > > > > It seems that copyright ownership could be an important obstacle to > archiving > > postprints. I have proposed at Lancaster that academic staff employment > > contracts be modified to make it clear that the university asserts its > rights > > as employer to copyright in staff research publications, but only to the > extent > > of reserving the right to authorise non-commercial publication on the > internet, > > e.g. in an eprints archive. This would circumvent a possible restriction > > resulting from any copyright assignment the author signs. The idea has > been met > > favourably here, both by the AUT (professional association) and > management, but > > both have referred it for discussion at national level. > > > > I think the university should be willing to forego any claim to income > from > > research publications, but should retain the right to authorise > non-commercial > > publication. The decision on when to publish, which version, etc, should > be > > left to the author(s), within a policy such as that suggested here for > > Southampton, which would greatly facilitate acceptance of eprints > archiving as > > a standard practice. > > > > cheers > > > > Sol > > ******************************** > > > > Prof. Sol Picciotto > > Head, > > Lancaster University Law School > > Lancaster University > > LANCASTER LA1 4YN, > > U.K. > > direct phone (44)(0)1524-592464 > > fax (44)(0)1524-525212 > > s.piccio...@lancaster.ac.uk > > > > ********************************** > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Stevan Harnad [SMTP:har...@ecs.soton.ac.uk] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 12:49 PM > > > To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org > > > Subject: Draft Policy for Self-Archiving University Research > Output > > > > > > Comments are invited on the following draft for a university policy on > > > the self-archiving of research output: > > > > > > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lac/archpol.html > > > > > > It is being formulated both for use at Southampton > > > University, and as a possible model for wider adoption, > > > particularly in connection with a recommended restructuring > > > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2373.html > > > of UK's Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) > > > http://www.rareview.ac.uk/ > > > and its emulation in other countries > > > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2356.html > > > > > > Stevan Harnad > > > >