Jacob Tummon has written a very good paper arguing the case for the elimination of copyright (HT Karl Fogel via QuestionCopyright).
Without any authorisation or permission, I have copied his paper verbatim (from LegalTree) and it appears below.
In promoting Jacob and his excellent arguments by copying his published treatise should I be prosecuted for copyright infringement?
STOP PRESS
Jacob has asked me to remove his paper (that appeared here 23/5/07-17/10/07) in order that he can attempt to meet the criteria for it to be re-published in a conventional journal, i.e. that it not be published in any form elsewhere.
This seems a rather outdated and retrograde policy for the journal to persist in maintaining, but if one must jump through old fangled hoops to reach an old fangled audience in order to demonstrate the hoops are an anachronistic folly, well, so be it.
I’m doubtful that this removal can constitute ‘not published elsewhere’ given that publication is an irreversible event. Notwithstanding that, there are situations in which there is a right to withdrawal of published works from distribution in the case of violation of privacy or jeopardy to life, but this doesn’t actually undo the historical event of publication.
For those who’d like to know what originally appeared on this page I recommend the Wayback Machine. Entering the URL of this page gives this page as at 22/07/07.
It seems the archived version of this page has now been removed from the Wayback Machine.
Comment #000142 at
2008-01-07 10:19
by
Crosbie Fitch
Jacob Tummon has written a very good paper arguing the case for the elimination of copyright (HT Karl Fogel via QuestionCopyright).
Without any authorisation or permission, I have copied his paper verbatim (from LegalTree) and it appears below.
In promoting Jacob and his excellent arguments by copying his published treatise should I be prosecuted for copyright infringement?
STOP PRESS
Jacob has asked me to remove his paper (that appeared here 23/5/07-17/10/07) in order that he can attempt to meet the criteria for it to be re-published in a conventional journal, i.e. that it not be published in any form elsewhere.
This seems a rather outdated and retrograde policy for the journal to persist in maintaining, but if one must jump through old fangled hoops to reach an old fangled audience in order to demonstrate the hoops are an anachronistic folly, well, so be it.
I’m doubtful that this removal can constitute ‘not published elsewhere’ given that publication is an irreversible event. Notwithstanding that, there are situations in which there is a right to withdrawal of published works from distribution in the case of violation of privacy or jeopardy to life, but this doesn’t actually undo the historical event of publication.
For those who’d like to know what originally appeared on this page I recommend the Wayback Machine. Entering the URL of this page gives this page as at 22/07/07.