The International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM) has released an evidence-based Statement on Journal Publishing Agreements and Copyright 'Addenda' (http://www.stmassoc.org/documents-statements-public-co/). The statement is expected to provide clarity to the debate on the rights that authors have over their published works. The debate continues to rage, and much coverage has been given to purportedly restrictive practices or policies, when in fact they do not exist for the majority of publishers, it is observed. The most recent examples surround the vote of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard for university ownership and distribution of research papers (February 2008).
According to STM, this is not only an inaccurate perception of the role of publishers and copyright, but also means that advocating authors to modify existing journal publishing agreements with 'copyright addenda' is a call for needless bureaucracy.
STM publishers invariably allow the authors of journal articles to use their published papers in their own teaching and for educational purposes generally within their institutions, it is observed. Most journals have policies that permit authors to provide copies of their papers to research colleagues, and to re-use portions of their papers in further works or books. Although some news-oriented science and medical magazines have a few restrictions on pre-publication posting, almost all research journals permit the posting by the author or the author's institution of some version of the paper on the Internet.
According to STM, publishers regularly review the needs and interests expressed by scholars, researchers and educators, and respond directly to these. There is therefore no need for fresh policies to broaden the rights of authors, STM representatives have opined.
More News in this Theme
