Bookmark and Share

For blogger: A threat, then an apology

The Society of Chemical Industry apologizes to PhD student after threatening her with legal action for posting figures from a journal on her blog


[Published 2nd May 2007 03:58 PM GMT]


The Society of Chemical Industry, owners of the Journal of Science of Food and Agriculture, recently apologized to blogger and PhD student Shelley Batts after threatening her with legal action for posting figures from one of the journal's papers on her blog.

On April 19, the Journal of Science of Food and Agriculture published a report on the amplified antioxidant effects in alcoholic fruit beverages like strawberry daiquiris. Batts, a neuroscience PhD candidate at the University of Michigan and author of the blog Retrospectacle, published an examination of the paper on April 24, including one graph and one chart from the paper.

The same day, an administrative assistant at the Society of Chemical Industry sent Batts an Email stating that her blog contained copyrighted material. "If these figures are not removed immediately, lawyers from John Wiley & Sons will contact you with further action," stated the Email. The Society of Chemical Industry works in partnership with John Wiley & Sons LTD to publish the journal.

"I was really scared," Batts told The Scientist. Posting figures from papers "was something we all did, all the science blogs, and I had been doing it since I started the blog. I always thought I was doing a public service, I wasn't plagiarizing or claiming it was my own data." However, after receiving the Email, Batts removed the graphics from her blog.

In response to the altercation, dozens of bloggers responded to Batts' situation, including Nature and Scientific American, many raising issues of fair use. Under Wiley's contract with the University of Michigan, students and researchers have access to the journals published by Wiley and can download, copy, or print out articles or items in articles for their "personal use."

After receiving a swell of support from the blogging community, Batts reposted the original charts, and Emailed Wiley for permission to use the modified graphics, but has not received a response.

On April 26, within an hour after popular blog Web sites BoingBoing and Slashdot published blogs about Batts's situation, Sarah Cooney, director of publications at the Society of Chemical Industry, sent an apology to Batts. "This was a general misunderstanding," Cooney wrote to The Scientist in an Email. "The situation arose as a result of a genuine error by a staff member at the Society's offices."

An excerpt from the Society's official response states, "We apologize for any misunderstanding. In this situation the publisher would typically grant permission on request in order to ensure that figures and extracts are properly credited. We do not think there is any need to pursue this matter further."

On April 27, the University of Michigan library employees who negotiate publication licenses sent Batts an Email, telling her she had not violated any copyright laws in posting the graphics from the Journal of Science of Food and Agriculture paper. Batts said this experience will not deter her from using graphics from published papers. "When I got that letter from the University of Michigan I breathed a sigh of relief."

What do you think about Batts's treatment? Click here and tell us.

Andrea Gawrylewski
mail@the-scientist.com

Links within this article:

Society of Chemical Industry
http://www.soci.org/SCI

K. Chanjirakul et al, "Natural volatile treatments increase free-radical scavenging capacity of strawberries and blackberries," Journal of Science of Food and Agriculture, published online April 19, 2007.
http://www3.interscience.wiley

Retrospectacle
http://scienceblogs.com/retrospectacle/

Nature Blog
http://network.nature.com/blogs/user/U971B9BE4/

Scientific American Blog
http://blog.sciam.com/index.php?

Discussion of fair use
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/26/1549206

Wiley Terms of Use
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/tacou.html

BoingBoing
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/tacou.html

Slashdot
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/26/1549206


Advertisement

 

Rate this article

Rating: 2.31/5 (13 votes )





I Recommend Science Commons
by Shelley Batts

[Comment posted 2007-05-03 19:51:10]
It is easy to say that a blogger should have asked permission from the publisher (to use a figure) when you are a mainstream news source. When I first started blogging I did try to do that, request permission. I got exactly zero responses to my email requests (actually, thats not true, I did get one 'ok'....3 months later). Whoever was on the other end wasn't taking bloggers seriously. If a request is submitted from a journal, newspaper, or magazine perhaps it is handled differently.

But, it became a moot point when I learned about 'fair use' which precluded the need to ask for permission for incidences of scientific discussion, education, and critique. Perhaps thats why all the journals never bothered to reply. Who knows.

Thing is, while in a perfect world it would be fast, easy, and efficient to request permission. It isn't. But, as my use of the figures was eventually backed up by UM as fair use, I suppose it doesn't matter in my case. I'm worried about other bloggers who is not necessarily backed up by a large university. They should know whats safe and whats not. For ongoing discussion, www.sciencecommons.org is a great resource.



Copyright in a digital world
by Jeff Myers, Managing Editor, The Scientist

[Comment posted 2007-05-03 13:28:00]
This is a double edged sword. The blogger should've at least notified Wiley that the article was being blogged about, and yet, the fact that the blogger readily acknowledged the source of the material should've been enough for Wiley to approach the situation and say 'gee, thanks for giving us more press, but next time get permission first before posting images.'






Future win-win relationships
by John Collins

[Comment posted 2007-05-03 08:16:46]
I can empathize with the terrifying feeling induced on receiving a threat of legal action. I think this is a grey area that many of us are unsure about. This was a an interesting exercise and example of how the future looks with respect to copyrights. Give credits as copyier and give permissions to publish as owner of the copyright; a win-win situation in disseminating knowledge quickly and so much free publicity for the publishers and original authors. What more can you want?



Fair Use Needs No Permission
by Karen

[Comment posted 2007-05-02 21:08:21]
The blogger's use of the figures was well within fair-use standards, as even verified by Wiley in the comments and by her own university's license negotiators. So permission wasn't needed, which is what fair use is all about. The email sent by the society's representatives was a 'chilling effect' meant to bully her into complying with something they knew full well was not their right to ask for. And if they didn't, they need new lawyers.




Blogs and Science
by Larry Woods

[Comment posted 2007-05-02 20:12:37]
It was sad the the SCI acted in such a heavy handed manner in reponse to the way science has always been done: publish, comment, respond, and argue to increase understanding -- even to advance scientific discovery another step.

This incident, at least to the extent I understand it, is an argument for setting up submission, review and publishing outside the traditional privately owned journal monopoly. Paying to publish, then paying to read, then paying to discuss scientific work which has already been paid for by government grants seems like a bizarre process.

Surely we can do better.



The News


Front Cover

Register for FREE Online Access

  • »Current issue
  • »Best Places to Work and Salary surveys
  • »Daily news and monthly contents emails

Register »

Subscribe to the Magazine

  • »Monthly print issues
  • »Unlimited online access
  • »Special offers on books, apparel, and more

Subscribe »

Library Subscriptions
Recommend to a Librarian

Masthead | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy
© 1986-2012 The Scientist