Copyright: The Ideal Framework for Editors of Scholarly Journals
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This paper discusses the concerns and issues that surround copyright and scholarly journals in the discipline of librarianship and information science as they affect editors, and describes the policies and practices of a major international publisher. Copyright is a challenging issue for both the editors and the contributors of papers to academic journals -and a feeling of becoming Janus descends as thoughts are marshalled for this paper, since editors are frequently also authors themselves.The challenge has been heightened by the questions raised as a result of major change in the nature of publishing.Many have taken place during the past decade.Changes in the academic community also have to be taken into account since individual academics and their departments can gain considerable benefits if the output of research publications is high, both in qualitative and quantitative terms.This paper focuses on questions concerning copyright at mid-2002 from the perspective of an editor.It is a fast moving field and any one of the issues noted above might have changed yet again by the time this paper appears in print.Whilst there have been a number of articles in the literature of information and library science which consider copyright from the author's point of view, less attention seems to have been paid to the editor's viewpoint.The question of the author's copyright rights and separate compensation for electronic copies of their work was tested out in the United States in the case of New York Times Co Inc versus Tasini, and in Canada in the case of Robertson and the Thomson Corporation. 1 In both cases it was ruled that the copyright was owned by the authors and that it did not include permission for the electronic reproduction of their works in any kind of database with, or without, compensation.The verdict in the Tasini case was widely reported in the professional press around the world, and authors became aware of how the situation might have changed as a result of electronic publishing.Seadle, however, has discussed the moral right of authors, notably attribution and integrity and indicated that this 'represents one of the last areas where US copyright law fundamentally diverges from that of its major trading partners and from its major digital and networking collaborators... the divergence represents a philosophical clash between the Anglo-US tradition, with its strict economic emphasis, and the natural rights basis of continental European law .. .
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,013 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle