gread at ACTRIX.GEN.NZ
Sat Mar 22 11:27:39 CST 1997
Richard A Fagerlund wrote:
>I believe, and I will illustrate my points, that the ICZN does not
>expressly prohibit electronic publications and I believe there can be
>some good reasons to consider them.
>Sec.III, art.8 What constitutes a publication.
>1). be reproduced in ink on paper by some method that assures numerous
I don't know why, but Richard has relied upon and quoted to us the thirty
year old 2nd edition.
However, even the draft fourth edition of last year does not grasp the
nettle of electronic publication.
"8d(i) A work produced after 1985 by a method that does not employ
printing on paper may be accepted as published within the meaning of the
Code if it meets the other requirements of this Article and is not
excluded by the provisions of Article 9."
Article nine is aware of acoustic recordings and computer printouts and
excludes them, but that's about it.
I dealt with a disputed possible nomenclatural act in a web page under my
control by putting in the disclaimer allowed in the 1985 ICZN. In this
case I felt the author was more at risk of intellectual piracy than that
anyone would seriously consider his observations as a publication under
the code. Others still disagreed.
Geoff Read <gread at actrix.gen.nz>
More information about the Taxacom