More on copyright
Thomas_Bjorkman at cornell.edu
Tue Mar 16 15:03:04 EST 1993
In article <113586 at netnews.upenn.edu> Matthew P Wiener,
weemba at sagi.wistar.upenn.edu writes:
>In article <1993Mar11.200702.10520 at news.columbia.edu>, dan at cubmol
>> In the US, if you pay for something to be printed, it must be
>>marked as an advertisement.
>This is utter nonsense.
>> Since most (all?) journals charge you
>>when you publish, the article must be marked as an advertisement.
>PNAS does this because it's the government printing something the
>government doesn't want to take responsibility for.
>-Matthew P Wiener (weemba at sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Neither one of these is right. The advertisement notice is part of the
postal regulations. For the journals to be sent by second class mail,
they have to follow the rules for magazines. With TIME magazine, it is
pretty obvious which is which. The editorials written by Mobil Oil are
marked advertizement for good reason, even when they are not
advertisements to buy their gasoline. Since a journal article is written
by the contributor, rather than the publication's staff, and the
contributor pays to have it printed, it has some thins in common with the
Mobil ad. Apparently so much so that the post office can't write rules
that inclues one but not the other.
Journals without page charges do not need the notice. Some with page
charges have ignored the rule and are getting away with it for now; one
of these is from a society I belong to. There was a big discussion
before they decided to become scofflaws.
More information about the Bioforum