For example, the copyright holder may transfer the rights to reproduce and disseminate a protected work to a publishing house, while retaining the right to make adaptations. The following agreement applies if the article submitted by Walter of Gruyter GmbH/ Walter de Gruyter, Inc. (the “publisher”) is accepted. Critics have argued that the copyright transmission agreement in the field of commercial scientific publishing “is as important as ensuring long-term asset management that it is a matter of providing services to the academic community,” because the practice seems to give the publisher a subsidy that does not seem to benefit the authors.  Copyright transfer agreements are often at odds with or appear to be at odds with self-archiving practices because of ambiguous language.  Considering how confusing a copyright could become if a much larger number of parties were involved in a large number of licenses and if transfers of certain copyrights were attributed to a single work. The transfer of copyright can become extremely complex. For example, a copyright transfer contract or a copyright transfer contract is an agreement that transfers the copyright of a work from the copyright holder to another party. It is a legal option for publishers and authors of books, magazines, movies, TELEVISION shows, video games and other commercial artistic works who want to include and use a work of a second creator: for example, a video game developer who wants to pay an artist to draw a boss to enter a game. Another option is to allow the right to include and use the work instead of transferring copyright. This is a fundamental discrepancy between the purpose of copyright (i.e. the full choice of an author/creator through the dissemination of works) and its application, because authors lose those rights when the copyright is transferred.
Such fundamental conceptual offences are underlined by the popular use of sites such as ResearchGate and Sci-Hub for illegal file sharing by academics and the general public.      In fact, broad and unlimited sharing helps to advance science faster than paywalled Articles, so it is possible to argue that the transfer of copyright is a basic misservice to the entire research enterprise.  It is also very counter-intuitive that learned societies, like the American Psychological Association, actively monitor and remove copyrighted content that they publish on behalf of authors [Note 3], because it is not in the interest of authors or the reuse of published research, and because the copyright transfer system is counterproductive (because original authors lose control and rights over their own work). Copyright transfer agreements are usually prepared by the publisher, and some print magazines contain a copy of the statement in each issue they have published.  If authors want to deviate from the standard wording – z.B. if they want to retain copyright or do not want to give the publisher an exclusive right to publish, they can indicate the desired changes by directly editing the document or adding an addition to a copy of the default version. However, the editorial guidelines for accepting these addendums vary. Some institutions provide instructions and support to staff to create such additions.   The author`s authorization to transfer non-exclusive rights allows the user to use the work on an equal footing with the holder of the exclusive rights that conferred them and/or other persons authorized to use it. The copyright agreement must contain the following essential conditions: copyright transfer agreements are a means of regulating rights on the basis of copyright. Since the advent of digital publishing, several commentators have drawn attention to the benefits of copyright copyright and publishers have begun to implement it  with licensing agreements, with the author retaining the copyright