I don´t know what is exactly the value of publishing a high impact paper in a journal or magazine (electronic or not, open-access or not). I have several doubts about the benefits of publishing on a journal. Sorry for asking so many questions in the same post but separately it would result redundant.

Is it a question of money, pride, prestige?

Is not it better for humanity to be published in an open place accessible to all, in a simple language without such academic rigor?

If the reason is money, how much can I earn with a high impact paper?

If my publication shows new methods and algorithms that solve overwhelming problems that involve big costs for the pharmaceutical and aeronautical industry, can I claim copyright if they implement my methods and algorithms? Publishing in a journal is better in that case?

How could I prevent it from being used for destructive purposes?

  • 5
    You already answer your question in your last paragraph: Reviews are important! When publishing in a journal you get review from experts (for free). Thus also, other people know that your work was reviewed by experts and is not some hogwash you just made up. – koalo Aug 31 '18 at 19:23
  • 1
    Copyright certainly does not prevent somebody else from implementing methods or algorithms that you have published. Patents (where applicable) might. Same with 'destructive purposes' which might be a questionable term at law anyway. Very unclear overall. – Jon Custer Aug 31 '18 at 19:24
  • 1
  • 2
    I am voting to leave this closed because a lot of different questions are asked at once and it is not clear what you already know or assume. Please edit your question to address this. – Wrzlprmft Sep 1 '18 at 9:10
  • 1

I can answer a couple of your questions and may revise as I learn more.

If you publish something then in many places you have copyright already. Registration of the work may be required in some places and once was in the US, but no longer. Here, at least, if you publish something the copyright is yours and while your words can't be used without a license, your ideas can.

The way to protect "inventions" is through patent. This will almost always require registration (and cost), but is the only way to keep others from exploiting your ideas (as distinct from your words). But if I describe an idea that leads to a "process" or invention, but don't patent it, then others can exploit it freely. They might even try to patent it themselves, but you can (more money) probably prevent that.

One of the big problems for a researcher is gaining a reputation. This implies the need for your work to be seen by as many people as possible. Self publishing and writing a journal has the problem that it is difficult for people to find your work. Publishers, with all their problems, provide a partial cure for that, as do conference presentations.

Finally, for now, you are unlikely, in the absence of a patent and an implementation of the patent, to make very much money from publishing. The exceptions are textbooks for elementary economics or calculus courses, but only a few others. If you want to make money from publishing, write popular novels. (But "popular" is the hard part.)

One possible exception to the above, is that you can self publish successfully provided that nearly all of the people who would be your audience already know how to find you. If you have an already popular blog, for example, read by nearly everyone who cares, then you might be fine. But building audience is a hard task.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer and the law varies widely around the world.


In essence, people publish in journals for two reasons:

  • Journals provide a relatively small number of central places where everything of interest is collected. As a consequence, it is (relatively) easy to find things there: If you're looking at how exactly the chemical reaction works that turns mercury into gold, then searching through the publications of a few dozen chemistry journals will suffice. On the other hand, if everyone just put their stuff onto their own web servers, things would be much harder to find.

  • Journals provide a seal that says "We had this paper peer-reviewed and it was found to be a good paper". This gives published papers a gravity that things you put on your own website do not have: I know that some of my colleagues have looked at it, and have found the work useful, correct, relevant.


Publishing articles will not bring you any money. Publishing open access may even cost something.

If a kind of invention is published you can usually not patent it anymore.

If you publish, you usually transfer the copyright of the text to the publisher.

Scientists mainly publish in journals, because there are so many new papers every day, and peer review and publishing in journals organize the cornucopia of works. Also, publications in a reputed journals may lead to a tenure position.

  • 1
    If you publish, you transfer the copyright of the text to the publisher. — Usually. In most fields. – JeffE Aug 31 '18 at 19:40
  • In many places publishing doesn't immediately prevent patent application, but you need to be prepared to start the process as there can be strict time limits. In some situations, also, you can retain copyright to a published work, but probably only for a very established author. So there are caveats to a couple of your statements. – Buffy Aug 31 '18 at 19:41
  • Granted, my answer is kept a little simple, but reading the question I felt like a simple and straightforward answer would be better than a long and detailed answer covering different fields/countries and special cases. – Dirk Aug 31 '18 at 20:11

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.