BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 26 Nov 2001 01:08:45 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
James Kilty said:

> I hope better informed scientist-beekeepers would be prepared
> to share at least a summary of the key findings

The problem would be that a working bee scientist would find
himself (or herself) restricted by the "terms and conditions"
of most printed journals from even posting the text of their OWN
work on the internet.

As most people would find their citations from a citation search
engine, the "terms and conditions" of that service would prevent
them from releasing the results of a search to non-subscribers.

It comes down to who "owns" the copyright, and what can be
copyrighted.  If you want to "be published", you must sign away
copyright rights to the journal.  If one were to post in a public
forum before the printed publication, he/she would never have
another paper accepted again without doing some serious groveling.

It is a tough place to be.  The very people who's work is of
interest to us have a choice between posting their work
here, or publishing in as a "cited journal publication".  When
they "publish" in a journal, they have less right to their own
writings than a journalist would have.  But they MUST "publish"
to further their careers and please their masters.  (Except for a
small number of us who were crazy enough to "go private"
- or is that "pirate"?)

There is a quiet war going on between many scientists and
the journals over this issue.  It is an important battle, and each
should make up his/her own mind on the issues.  You can read
the debate in the Journal "Nature" here:

        www.nature.com/nature/debates/e-access/

My view is that "science journals" are an endangered species,
and their ever-more draconian restrictions will only insure a
more speedy demise.  Good riddance.  It has made me laugh
that, for the last decade, I am forced to read paper journals
about even ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING.

Think about it - new research in electronic publishing is
painted in toxic chemicals on compressed dead trees,
and sent, months after it was written, by fossil-fuel burning
vehicles to my desk.  You gotta laugh.  If you don't, you'll cry.

        jim

ATOM RSS1 RSS2