The situation in which authors own copyright is generally linked to considerable efforts in the form of correspondence and recordings and often results in unnecessary delays. While this may seem trivial for some applications, a good scientific journal, which publishes exciting work, can expect several hundred applications per year; A task of this magnitude can become cumbersome. On the other hand, if the Journal holds the copyright, applications, value judgments and authorizations can be dealt with quickly to the satisfaction of all parties involved. In the field of academic publishing, copyright transfer contracts generally do not involve remuneration or royalties.  These agreements are a key element of subscription academic publication and are intended to facilitate the processing of copyright in pure print publishing.  In the era of electronic communications, the benefits of copyright transfer contracts have been called into question and, although they remain the norm, open licenses as used in open access publications have been established as alternatives.  Any questions about copyright transfer contracts can be emailed to firstname.lastname@example.org. You can use our web return form or contact the editor. Copyright transfer agreements have become commonplace in publishing under the Copyright Act of 1976 in the United States and similar laws in other countries in the publishing sector, redefining copyright from the date of birth (instead of publication) of a work.
 This required publishers to acquire copyright from the author to sell or access the works, and written statements signed by the rights holder were necessary for the transfer of copyright to be considered valid.   In 2017, the 9th Court of Appeal of Johnson v. Storix confirmed a transfer of copyright without a written assignment.  In this case, the author sold the Anthony Johnson software as an individual contractor and built his business in 2003 under the title Storix, Inc. The court upheld a jury decision that Johnson transferred the copyright to the company on the basis of an annual report he wrote and signed that he had transferred “all the assets” of his individual company. The jury rejected Johnson`s assertion that he only wanted to transfer the license to sell the software and also decided that Johnson would become a loan plant after the company was founded, thereby losing all rights to his spin-off works. This is the first case in which a document that is not itself a contract or agreement and does not contain a reference to copyright has been considered a “reference or a mention” of copyright transmission and where, for the first time, a single owner of a company has been characterized as embedded for copyright purposes. [doubtful – discuss] This serves as a lesson that a “letter” required by copyright law does not necessarily have to be “clear” but may contain ambiguous language that can be interpreted by dealing with the alleged transaction from third parties. Traditional methods of scientific publication require a complete and exclusive transfer of copyright from authors to publisher, usually as a precondition for publication.      This process entrusts control and ownership of the dissemination and reproduction of authors as authors to publishers as broadcasters, who are then able to monetize the process.  The transfer and ownership of copyright is a delicate tension between the protection of authors` rights and the interests of publishers and institutions, both in financial and reputational law.  In OA publications, authors generally retain copyright in their work, and articles and other editions benefit from a wide range of licenses depending on the type.