on 10 Aug 2000 Stevan Harnad <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am not missing the point. I am stressing a crucial distinction, so as
> to prevent the refereed journal literature from continuing to have its
> fate linked to the non-give-away literature, whose writers write for
> fees or royalties. My recommendations having nothing to do with the
> latter, and everything to do with the former; the distinction must be
> made, and what is right for the one is not right for the other.
>
> (I normally repeat ritually, like a mantra "the non-give-away literature
> = books and magazine articles written for royalty or fee" but I used a
> short-hand this time and said only books!)
>
> But I am fairly sure that Al Henderson is not just referring to the
> royalty/fee literature...
To clarify, I was emphasizing refereed journal
articles, monographs, etc. when I said that
authors give nothing away. They exchange rights
for recognition and dissemination. Self-archiving
lacks distinction at best and, at worst, may confuse
a work with all the amateur stuff unleashed on the
web with all the best intentions.
Albert Henderson
Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 1994-2000
<[email protected]>
