Criminal Editing of the Enemy (war: [Fwd: [biblio-info-sociedad] Fwd: Los EE.UU. prohíben la publicación ... )

[Michael Jost <jo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hallo,

offenbar ist meine schon etwas ältere weitergeleitete Nachricht
von neulich immer noch aktuell.



X-URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/28/national/28PUBL.html
   The New York Times
   _________________________________________________________________

 February 28, 2004

 Treasury Department Is Warning Publishers of the Perils of
 Criminal Editing of the Enemy

   By ADAM LIPTAK

   Writers often grumble about the criminal things editors do to their
   prose. The federal government has recently weighed in on the same
   issue -- literally.

   It has warned publishers they may face grave legal consequences for
   editing manuscripts from Iran and other disfavored nations, on the
   ground that such tinkering amounts to trading with the enemy.

   Anyone who publishes material from a country under a trade embargo is
   forbidden to reorder paragraphs or sentences, correct syntax or
   grammar, or replace "inappropriate words," according to several
   advisory letters from the Treasury Department in recent months.

   Adding illustrations is prohibited, too. To the baffled dismay of
   publishers, editors and translators who have been briefed about the
   policy, only publication of "camera-ready copies of manuscripts" is
   allowed.

   The Treasury letters concerned Iran. But the logic, experts said,
   would seem to extend to Cuba, Libya, North Korea and other nations
   with which most trade is banned without a government license.

   Laws and regulations prohibiting trade with various nations have been
   enforced for decades, generally applied to items like oil, wheat,
   nuclear reactors and, sometimes, tourism. Applying them to grammar,
   spelling and punctuation is an infuriating interpretation, several
   people in the publishing industry said.

   "It is against the principles of scholarship and freedom of
   expression, as well as the interests of science, to require publishers
   to get U.S. government permission to publish the works of scholars and
   researchers who happen to live in countries with oppressive regimes,"
   said Eric A. Swanson, a senior vice president at John Wiley & Sons,
   which publishes scientific, technical and medical books and journals.

   Nahid Mozaffari, a scholar and editor specializing in literature from
   Iran, called the implications staggering. "A story, a poem, an article
   on history, archaeology, linguistics, engineering, physics,
   mathematics, or any other area of knowledge cannot be translated, and
   even if submitted in English, cannot be edited in the U.S.," she said.

   "This means that the publication of the PEN Anthology of Contemporary
   Persian Literature that I have been editing for the last three years,"
   she said, "would constitute aiding and abetting the enemy."

   Allan Adler, a lawyer with the Association of American Publishers,
   said the trade group was unaware of any prosecutions for criminal
   editing. But he said the mere fact of the rules had scared some
   publishers into rejecting works from Iran.

   Lee Tien, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil
   liberties group, questioned the logic of making editors a target of
   broad regulations that require a government license.

   "There is no obvious reason why a license is required to edit where no
   license is required to publish," he said. "They can print anything as
   is. But they can't correct typos?"

   In theory -- almost certainly only in theory -- correcting
   typographical errors and performing other routine editing could
   subject publishers to fines of $500,000 and 10 years in jail.

   "Such activity," according to a September letter from the department's
   Office of Foreign Assets Control to the Institute of Electrical and
   Electronics Engineers, "would constitute the provision of prohibited
   services to Iran."

   Tara Bradshaw, a Treasury Department spokeswoman, confirmed the
   restrictions on manuscripts from Iran in a statement. Banned
   activities include, she wrote, "collaboration on and editing of the
   manuscripts, the selection of reviewers, and facilitation of a review
   resulting in substantive enhancements or alterations to the
   manuscripts."

   She did not respond to a request seeking an explanation of the
   department's reasoning.

   Congress has tried to exempt "information or informational materials"
   from the nation's trade embargoes. Since 1988, it has prohibited the
   executive branch from interfering "directly or indirectly" with such
   trade. That exception is known as the Berman Amendment, after its
   sponsor, Representative Howard L. Berman, a California Democrat.

   Critics said the Treasury Department had long interpreted the
   amendment narrowly and grudgingly. Even so, Mr. Berman said, the
   recent letters were "a very bizarre interpretation."

   "It is directly contrary to the amendment and to the intent of the
   amendment," he said. "I also don't understand why it's not in our
   interest to get information into Iran."

   Kenneth R. Foster, a professor of bioengineering at the University of
   Pennsylvania, said the government had grown insistent on the editing
   ban. "Since 9/11 and since the Bush administration took office," he
   said, "the Treasury Department has been ramping up enforcement."

   Publishers may still seek licenses from the government that would
   allow editing, but many First Amendment specialists said that was an
   unacceptable alternative.

   "That's censorship," said Leon Friedman, a Hofstra law professor who
   sometimes represents PEN. "That's a prior restraint."

   Esther Allen, chairwoman of the PEN American Center's translation
   committee, said the rules would also appear to ban translations.
   "During the cold war, the idea was to let voices from behind the Iron
   Curtain be heard," she said. "Now that's called trading with the
   enemy?"

   In an internal legal analysis last month, the publishers' association
   found that the regulations "constitute a serious threat to the U.S.
   publishing community in general and to scholarly and scientific
   publishers in particular." Mr. Adler, the association's lawyer, said
   it was trying to persuade officials to alter the regulations and might
   file a legal challenge.

   These days, journals published by the engineering institute reject
   manuscripts from Iran that need extensive editing and run a disclaimer
   with those they accept, said Michael R. Lightner, the institute vice
   president responsible for publications. "It tells readers," he said,
   "that the article did not get the final polish we would like."

   Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company