Discipline | Catalysis |
---|---|
Language | English |
Edited by | Johannes A. Lercher |
Publication details | |
History | 1962-present |
Publisher | |
Frequency | Monthly |
8.047 (2021) | |
Standard abbreviations | |
ISO 4 | J. Catal. |
Indexing | |
CODEN | JCTLA5 |
ISSN | 0021-9517 (print) 1090-2694 (web) |
LCCN | 64005979 |
OCLC no. | 1783064 |
Links | |
The Journal of Catalysis is a monthly peer-reviewed scientific journal covering research on all aspects of heterogeneous and homogeneous catalysis. It is published by Elsevier and it was established in 1962 by Jan Hendrik de Boer and P. W. Selwood. The current editor-in-chief is Johannes A. Lercher (Technische Universität München). [1] Other members of the editorial board include Bert Weckhuysen and Joachim Sauer. [1] Former editors-in-chief have been F. S. Stone, W. K. Hall, G. L. Haller, W. N. Delgass, and E. Iglesia.
According to the Journal Citation Reports , the journal has a 2021 impact factor of 8.047. [2]
In the mid-1980s, photocopies of eight selections from the journal (four articles, two notes, and two letters to the editor) were at the center of American Geophysical Union v. Texaco, Inc. , a key case in American copyright law. They were in the files of Donald Chickering, a chemical engineer working at Texaco's research center outside Beacon, New York, United States, made by the research center's internal library. Academic Press, the journal's then-publisher, the American Geophysical Union and several other publishers whose journals Texaco subscribed to, alleged that the company's bulk photocopying of articles they published, without paying them sufficient licensing royalties through the Copyright Clearance Center, was copyright infringement. [3]
Texaco claimed as its primary defense fair use, citing an earlier case where similar photocopying of journal articles by two federal government research centers was held to be non-infringing. One aspect of that defense was transformative use, a relatively new concept at the time, derived from Harvard Law Review article two years earlier by Pierre Leval, a federal judge who was assigned to hear the case. Texaco argued, among other things, that the photocopies were transformative use since they enabled its scientists to take the articles into their labs where they might get damaged during experiments, something they would not do with the originals in the journal. Leval rejected that argument, [4] and held that the company's photocopying was an infringement of the publisher's copyright. Texaco appealed to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed Leval in 1995; it was the first time an appellate court had considered the transformative use question. [5]
Fair use is a doctrine in United States law that permits limited use of copyrighted material without having to first acquire permission from the copyright holder. Fair use is one of the limitations to copyright intended to balance the interests of copyright holders with the public interest in the wider distribution and use of creative works by allowing as a defense to copyright infringement claims certain limited uses that might otherwise be considered infringement. Unlike "fair dealing" rights that exist in most countries that were part of the British Empire in the 20th century, the fair use right is a general exception that applies to all different kinds of uses with all types of works and turns on a flexible proportionality test that examines the purpose of the use, the amount used, and the impact on the market of the original work.
Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc., 153 F.3d 82, was a copyright case about the Russian language weekly Russian Kurier in New York City that had copied and published various materials from Russian newspapers and news agency reports of Itar-TASS. The case was ultimately decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The decision was widely commented upon and the case is considered a landmark case because the court defined rules applicable in the U.S. on the extent to which the copyright laws of the country of origin or those of the U.S. apply in international disputes over copyright. The court held that to determine whether a claimant actually held the copyright on a work, the laws of the country of origin usually applied, but that to decide whether a copyright infringement had occurred and for possible remedies, the laws of the country where the infringement was claimed applied.
Pierre Nelson Leval is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. At the time of his appointment by President Bill Clinton in 1993, he was a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Williams & Wilkins Co. v. United States, 487 F.2d 1345, was an important intellectual property decision by the federal Court of Claims, later affirmed by a per curiam opinion from an evenly divided United States Supreme Court, with only eight justices voting. The decision held that it was a fair use for libraries to photocopy articles for use by patrons engaged in scientific research.
CCH Canadian Ltd v Law Society of Upper Canada, [2004] 1 SCR 339, 2004 SCC 13 is a landmark Supreme Court of Canada case that established the threshold of originality and the bounds of fair dealing in Canadian copyright law. A group of publishers sued the Law Society of Upper Canada for copyright infringement for providing photocopy services to researchers. The Court unanimously held that the Law Society's practice fell within the bounds of fair dealing.
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994), was a United States Supreme Court copyright law case that established that a commercial parody can qualify as fair use. This case established that the fact that money is made by a work does not make it impossible for fair use to apply; it is merely one of the components of a fair use analysis.
Self-archiving is the act of depositing a free copy of an electronic document online in order to provide open access to it. The term usually refers to the self-archiving of peer-reviewed research journal and conference articles, as well as theses and book chapters, deposited in the author's own institutional repository or open archive for the purpose of maximizing its accessibility, usage and citation impact. The term green open access has become common in recent years, distinguishing this approach from gold open access, where the journal itself makes the articles publicly available without charge to the reader.
Jon Ormond Newman is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
In United States copyright law, transformative use or transformation is a type of fair use that builds on a copyrighted work in a different manner or for a different purpose from the original, and thus does not infringe its holder's copyright. Transformation is an important issue in deciding whether a use meets the first factor of the fair-use test, and is generally critical for determining whether a use is in fact fair, although no one factor is dispositive.
Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States establishing that information alone without a minimum of original creativity cannot be protected by copyright. In the case appealed, Feist had copied information from Rural's telephone listings to include in its own, after Rural had refused to license the information. Rural sued for copyright infringement. The Court ruled that information contained in Rural's phone directory was not copyrightable and that therefore no infringement existed.
In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major copyrightable elements of a first, previously created original work. The derivative work becomes a second, separate work independent in form from the first. The transformation, modification or adaptation of the work must be substantial and bear its author's personality sufficiently to be original and thus protected by copyright. Translations, cinematic adaptations and musical arrangements are common types of derivative works.
Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146 was a case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit involving a copyright infringement claim against Amazon.com, Inc. and Google, Inc., by the magazine publisher Perfect 10, Inc. The court held that framing and hyperlinking of original images for use in an image search engine constituted a fair use of Perfect 10's images because the use was highly transformative, and thus not an infringement of the magazine's copyright ownership of the original images.
Authors Guild v. Google 721 F.3d 132 was a copyright case heard in federal court for the Southern District of New York, and then the Second Circuit Court of Appeals between 2005 and 2015. It concerned fair use in copyright law and the transformation of printed copyrighted books into an online searchable database through scanning and digitization. It centered on the legality of the Google Book Search Library Partner project that had been launched in 2003.
A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 114 F.Supp.2d 896 (2000), was the district court case which preceded the landmark intellectual property case of A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (2001). The case was heard by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Napster appealed this case to United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Cambridge University Press et al. v. Patton et al., 1:2008cv01425, was a case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in which three publishers, Cambridge University Press, SAGE Publications, and Oxford University Press, initially filed suit in 2008 against Georgia State University for copyright infringement.
Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, 559 U.S. 154 (2010), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving copyright law. The Court held that failure to register a copyright under Section 411 (a) of the United States Copyright Act does not limit a Federal Court's jurisdiction over claims of infringement regarding unregistered works.
A copyright transfer agreement or copyright assignment agreement is an agreement that transfers the copyright for a work from the copyright owner to another party. This is one legal option for publishers and authors of books, magazines, movies, television shows, video games, and other commercial artistic works who want to include and use a work of a second creator: for example, a video game developer who wants to pay an artist to draw a boss to include in a game. Another option is to license the right to include and use the work, rather than transferring the copyright.
Controlled digital lending (CDL) is a model by which libraries digitize materials in their collection and make them available for lending. It is based on interpretations of the United States copyright principles of fair use and copyright exhaustion.
Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith is a U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with transformative use, a component of fair use, under U.S. copyright law. At issue was the Prince Series created by Andy Warhol based on a photograph of the musician Prince by Lynn Goldsmith. It held Warhol's changes were insufficiently transformative to fall within fair use for commercial purposes, resolving an issue arising from a split between the Second and Ninth circuits among others.