Copyright: The Ideal Framework for Editors of Scholarly Journals
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 .. .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it