[GOAL] Re: Elsevier is taking down papers from Academia.edu

[Peter Murray-Rust]

CC-BY - they were published through BioMedCentral. Springer labelled all
images that went through their business as (C) SpringerImages. This
included Wikimedia, many third-parties and I even found D*sn*y content.

Wikimedia rightly cared.

No-one in academia cared.

Of course it's copyright breach.

The point is that toll-access publishers have a mentality that everything
that crosses their doors belongs to them. It's much cheaper to claim the
lot rather than work out what they own and what they don't. It's only
awkward people like me who care.



On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Jan Velterop <velterop at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10 Dec 2013, at 13:05, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Elsevier are the worst offender that I have investigated, followed by
> Springer who took all my Open Access images, badged them as (C)
> SpringerImages and offered them for resale at 60 USD per image. Just
> because OA is only 5% of your business doesn't mean practice can be
> substandard.
>
>
> Peter, what licence did you publish your OA images under? CC-BY? If so,
> re-labelling them as "© Springer" is a form of copyright breach
> (actionable?), but selling them isn't, of course.
>
> Jan Velterop
>
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL at eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
>


-- 
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20131210/5a963e93/attachment.html