Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
RE Lev Michael's post on the ethics of different modes of publication: Linguist 12.1462 Web-publication can have the effect of rendering papers invisible to those in developing countries. It is fortunate that you have high-speed web access (not to mention a computer), something that many of my colleagues in Africa cannot take for granted. Additionally, printed articles are "platform independent", whereas the hassles that face even us in North American universities in trying to deal with postscript, PDF, Latex, and whatever, can be enormous. The simple problem of fonts and the Mac/PC divide is evidence to me that current web technology and practice is not satisfactory as a sole mode of publishing. Given how file formats and other computer specifications change quickly, one should expect an article web-published in 2001 to be un-openable in 2101. Most books don't crumble that quickly. Web-publication, *when it replaces print publication*, simply changes the way in which information becomes unavailable. Having both formats is better than just one. However, I don't see in what way this is exactly an ethical issue. The question of intellectual property rights on the other hand is an ethical one, but I see neither any point of principle or practice that makes one mode of publication "more ethical". Theft of digital material by copying is just as possible as theft of analog (printed) material. Dave OddenMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue