Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Submission + - Nature Publishing Group Requires Authors to Waive "Moral Rights" to Works (chronicle.com)

cranky_chemist writes: Megan O'Neil has published a story on the Chronicle of Higher Education's website noting some unusual language in the license agreement between authors and Nature Publishing Group.

"Faculty authors who contract to write for the publisher of Nature, Scientific American, and many other journals should know that they could be signing away more than just the economic rights to their work, according to the director of the Office of Copyright and Scholarly Communication at Duke University.

Kevin Smith, the Duke official, said he stumbled across a clause in the Nature Publishing Group’s license agreement last week that states that authors waive or agree not to assert "any and all moral rights they may now or in the future hold" related to their work. In the context of scholarly publishing, "moral rights" include the right of the author always to have his or her name associated with the work and the right to have the integrity of the work protected such that it is not changed in a way that could result in reputational harm."

Nature Publishing Group claims the waivers are required to ensure the journal's ability to publish formal retractions and/or corrections.

However, the story further notes that Nature Publishing Group is requiring authors at institutions with open-access policies to sign waivers that exempt their work from such policies.

Comment Re:Whaling bad, mass breeding cattle and pigs good (Score 2) 188

1) It all matters. The same people who oppose rainforest devastation for food oppose whaling for food. The same people who don't give a shit about the rainforest don't, generally speaking, give a shit about whales.

2) They're a slow-breeding, unfarmed animal. Whaling has essentially been outlawed* because they can't sustain being hunted for food.

*Countries can go cap-in-hand to the UN to ask for a quota, for example to preserve small-scale traditional hunting. It goes without saying that Japan's present whaling operation doesn't meet the cultural criteria.

Comment Re:Autism is Evolution (Score 1) 558

1) Autism isn't known to be a set of mutations that are "favourable". It's currently only weakly shown what the genetic component is, much less the impact of those genes in other areas than autism. I don't think you'd call fragile X syndrome a beneficial trait for instance.

2) Autism isn't shown to tend toward "advanced intellect and lower animalistic emotion-driven behavior". There is a body of evidence that autistic children show poor systematisation and problem solving, for instance, traits that are disadvantageous in technical activities. (In conflict with the widely-known but scientifically niche "hyper-systematisation" hypothesis of Baron-Cohen.)

3) There's no real evidence that intellect and emotion are opposed traits

4) There's no real evidence that emotion is an animalistic trait

5) There's no evidence that animalistic traits are bad

6) You do not get "an autist 70% of the time" when you "breed two intellectuals"

7) Evolution is a process that happens to ensembles of traits and individuals, not particular changes. Talking about a change as evolutionary is like talking about an atom's motion as being "high temperature".

8) Evolution is not a process from animal to man to better-than-man. It isn't even a process from worse to better in any anthromorphic sense.

Comment Re: Clearly vaccination is to blame! (Score 2) 558

1) They're very quick to play hero when the other doctor is wrong
2) a) They weren't "quick to say" it, they produced an enormous body of evidence.
2) b) The moon disappears. You're blamed. I'm pretty sure that you can show you're not responsible without knowing who the actual culprit is.

Slashdot Top Deals

I program, therefore I am.

Working...