[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: How is withholding access to published specimens ethical?
> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 15:37:03 -0700
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: RE: How is withholding access to published specimens ethical?
> Well, I don't think Perez-Moreno is the one being evil. The specimen's not
> his to speak for any longer, and I don't think he forbade anyone from
> distributing his thesis. It's not like Charig, who banned anyone from
> distributing his thesis, even after his death. So to this day, you have to
> visit London and write notes if you want to know about archosauriforms
> described in the 1950s.
Are you implying Charig was evil? Even with Charig's unpublished work being
undistributable, it is apparently possible to access and publish on his
material (Butler et al. 2009 on *Hypselorhachis*), so I don't know why so many
of the specimens remain totally unpublished.
I wonder which taxon has spent the *shortest* time in limbo after being
abandoned by the person originally working on it? Chabli named "Gravisaurus"
in a thesis in 1988, and Taquet & Russell formally published it as
*Lurdusaurus* in 1999, a fairly brief span compared to everything else we've