 |
 |
Error during command authentication.
Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=10061, phase=CONNECT, target=127.0.0.1:2306). The server is probably not started.
Hi all, I can offer some information from my past work at JSTOR and current work at OUP. I hope it might be of service. JSTOR scans journal pages as they appeared in print, so if the images are B&W, that is how they were originally published. There isn't a system in place to manipulate images within our PDF scans. If there was a case of a color image appearing in B&W on JSTOR, my best guess would be that an error occurred when the file was created. The basic scan is in black and white, and then images get full-color, higher-resolution attention, I believe. As for OUP removing images from ejournals, I know that's frustrating and I'm sorry it has happened. I don't work in that department, but I imagine that old license agreements would have likely cleared rights only for print, so if you put older issues online, you'd have to re-clear one image at a time. (If it's recent content you're referencing, though, I'd hope both print and digital would be cleared as standard going forward, but I guess it could be a cost issue.) The reason that JSTOR has better availability of images is because they present the journals in a very particular manner. As such, they are able to take advantage of a specific protection under US copyright law afforded to collective works. JSTOR scans from hard copies and presents the page images in order, so you can page through a whole volume exactly as it existed in print. (With all front and back matter, etc.) They present a faithful copy of the original, which legally works out to be more a transfer of medium or revision than a republishing. Based on a combination of case law and section 201c of US copyright law, it has been established that unless the publisher had agreements specifically ceding their right to a revision, it requires no additional rights to display the images alongside the text under these circumstances. It's sort of the legal equivalent of putting the journals on microfilm rather than republishing them as an ejournal. Most publishers' websites just aren't set up to meet these criteria, though. That's why JSTOR is great for art journals, and I hope they all join the archive! This is also why JSTOR keeps digitizing from hard copies rather than taking in electronic files, in many cases. When ingesting e-only journals, I think the law gets a little blurrier. While I was at JSTOR, if an art journal was willing to join but only on the condition of blacking out a large percentage of images, it affected our willingness to add them to the archive. If there was a specific problem, whether a post-release complaint or a small quantity of known image problems, we were willing to black out the given image(s). But in general, any blacked-out images you'll find in journals should be particular exceptions, not a common practice. I hope my past and current employers will forgive me for attempting to summarize these issues here. I just want to say in general that we find this frustrating, too. Alodie Larson Editor, Oxford Art Online ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mail submissions to [log in to unmask] For information about joining ARLIS/NA see: http://www.arlisna.org/membership/join-arlisna Send administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc) to [log in to unmask] ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance: http://lsv.arlisna.org Questions may be addressed to list owner (Judy Dyki) at: [log in to unmask] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~