Re: Copyright or wrong
Andrew Boyd (andrew at pcug.org.au)
Thu, 06 Jun 1996 15:37:28 +1000
At 01:04 PM 6/6/96 +1000, Chris Howe wrote:
>>Copyright Information: All postings to the list are deemed to be public
>>comment, and therfore reproduceable in other forms to aid the dissemination
>>of information about Rainbowfish. However, common courtesy would dictate
>>that all reproduction be cleared with the author(s) of the original
>>posting(s). Articles may be posted to the list for general comment prior to
>>publication in outside fora. The list co-owners take no resposibility for
>>any non-compliance.
> Posting information that may later be submitted to an academic
>publication may (theoretically) lay you open to a charge of publishing work
>twice. When you submit work to a refereed journal you are asked to declare
>that it hasn't been previously published. Some journals are very legalistic
>about this (I know a lot of the biomedical journals are). I guess not many
>of the group are too affected by this but I thought it was worth mentioning,
>for those who do attempt the peculiar little rituals of publishing in
>refereed journals. I think in most cases it would be easy to share the
>information you have anyway, just don't post a full preprint of your magnum
>opus, or anything like that.
This sounds like excellent advice, Chris. Academic posters should keep it
in mind so as not to prejudice their valuable work.
That being said and done, don't let it scare anyone off posting anything
relevent on this list. In the case of the magnum opus, maybe it could be
published first by the journals officially with a pointer here referring to
it for interested readers.
Regards, Andrew Boyd
___________________________________________________________________
Andrew Boyd - andrew at pcug.org.au - http://www.pcug.org.au/~andrew
"I wouldn't want to disappoint you by not disappointing you"
___________________________________________________________________