I honestly doubt that what you describe was done by the copyeditor, though–it was far more likely done by an editor.

But, just to illustrate that there’s a balance of interests and responsibility here, let me relate an ancient story. I was getting the first segment of my thesis published in the major journal of my field. It was thrilling. I had the usual back and forth, more with the editor but with the copyeditor as well, it didn’t help that I had had to define and use two common language terms in a more rigourous manner, but we got through it ok, and I was happy. When I finally send back the last proof (this was the 1980s, no exchange of computer files) I knew what my article would look like, but I still looked forward to the actual physical print, bound journal, which was to come out many months later, of course. This was the first fruits of my work acknowledged in a major vehicle, so of course I was like an enthused kid (well, I was still pretty much a kid anyway). Talk about ‘wrapping up egos.’

Finally, the journal issue came out. Imagine my chagrin, then, when I discovered that the article was slightly different from the final proof I saw. No, not a footnote – the _title_ of my article was changed! I was dumbfounded. The article had already been cited in other articles and grants with the prevois “incorrect” title. It was not so much the change, but the fact that it was changed without even asking or telling me. In the end, I lodged no complaint and simply ignored it, it was too much of a hassle, and the end result at best would have been an erratum in a later journal, thus a perpetuating the ambiguity about the article’s identity (note, in academics, articles from the same author can have titles differing only by small changes, not a good idea, but done). It might not have been even a big deal (my advisor sniffed at me about it) except it was my first big major publication. Sigh.

It took me a little while to convince myself that every other copy editor out there wasn’t out to ‘get’ me. I’ll skirt a well worn cliche here: respect and cooperation should go both ways.

It can be very difficult for authors to find a copyeditor with whom they’re compatible–one who strengthens their weaknesses without weakening their strengths. Some copyeditors get so caught up in minutiae that they’re unable to see the story as a whole. I always recommend to authors that if they find a copyeditor they really like, they stick with him or her if at all possible.

See my post here on this topic.