Wiley Interscience: Where Science Meets Legal Threats

| 12 Comments | 1 TrackBack

Shelley Batts over at Retrospectacle was contacted yesterday by a representative of Wiley Interscience, who objected to her fair use of part of one figure from a paper. Shelley has posted the exchange on her blog.

Wiley’s legal threats are baseless because fair use allows people “to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism.” In addition, this move by Wiley is very stupid given that Shelley was promoting a paper published in one of their journals. She was providing good press for them. But in one stupid move Wiley has turned that good press into bad press.

Because of this I will not be publishing in any Wiley journal for the foreseeable future, and I call on others to do the same.

If you want to email the journal about this, here is the contact information.

Update: Wiley has a record of acting dubiously. (via Afarensis.)

Update: An apology has been issued.

1 TrackBack

Fair Use and Open Science from A Blog Around The Clock on April 25, 2007 11:54 PM

If you read other Scienceblogs and not just me, you are likely quite aware of the "Wiley Affair", but if you are not here is a quick summary:... Read More


Thanks so much for your support!!

(Btw, its Shelley not Shirley.) :)

Fixed. Would you believe me if I said that I call everyone “Shirley”?

Reed, Shirley you jest.

Re “(Btw, its Shelley not Shirley.) :)”

Or as Leslie Nielson would say: “Don’t call me Shirley!” :D

Wiley is puckered at both ends.

Best analysis and suggestion so far. Kudos to Reed and Shelley for standing up against Ol’ Wiley misbehaving.

Moran noted that online publishers like PLOS explicitly allow more than fair use, so I hope online publishing, archives and copyleft gets a deserved boost.


Won’t publish Won’t subscribe Won’t even read! (IF I can avoid it)

“Wiley’s legal threats…”

Did Wiley make any legal threats? The only correspondence is from an Editorial Assistant Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. Is there any reason to believe that anyone at Wiley, especially anyone with knowledge of copyright law, had any knowledge of this.

Lawyers don’t spend all their time pressing legal actions. They spend a lot of time explaining to would-be-plaintiffs why their proposed case is baseless. Is it possible that when this Editorial Assistant contacted Wiley to demand action, they would have told her that there was no action to take?

Open Access, folks. There’s a huge benefit for the promotion of science, besides just getting cited more.

A sales jock wants me to use a Wiley text for my course - 700 copies/semester. I mentioned this to him. He doesn’t think the two publishing arms are at all closely related ([cynicism]of COURSE they aren’t[/cynicism]) but just to humor me, he’ll be passing my concerns up the line.

Just my two cents.

fusilier James 2:24

For some reason, I am reminded of this from writer Peter David: “If you disagree with someone, say it with words, because saying it with punitive, retaliatory measures proves nothing except that you are petty and intolerant.”

Not saying the publisher was in the right here. But is the response advocated (not publishing in their journals, etc.) proportional to the original action?

Not saying the publisher was in the right here. But is the response advocated (not publishing in their journals, etc.) proportional to the original action?

Wiley and other science publishers take publically funded research and then bury it behind their profit wall.

They did not pay for the material, they did not pay the reviewers. In days gone by, there were no good ways to distribute research results other than print. Good riddance!

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Reed A. Cartwright published on April 25, 2007 2:18 PM.

Tangled Bank #78 was the previous entry in this blog.

Hexley: Evidence of Evolution’s Satanic Origins is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.



Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter