Slashdot Mirror
Elsevier Wants $15 Million In 'Piracy' Damages From Sci-Hub and Libgen (torrentfreak.com)
lbalbalba writes: Elsevier, one of the largest academic publishers, is demanding $15 million in damages from Sci-Hub and LibGen, who make paywalled scientific research papers freely available to the public [without permission]. A good chunk of these papers are copyrighted, many by Elsevier. Elsevier has requested a default judgment of $15 million against the defendants for their "truly egregious conduct" and "staggering" infringement. Sci-Hub's efforts are backed by many prominent scholars, who argue that tax-funded research should be accessible to everyone. Others counter that the site doesn't necessarily help the "open access" movement move forward. Sci-Hub's founder Alexandra Elbakyan defends her position and believes that what she does is helping millions of less privileged researchers to do their work properly by providing free access to research results.
Couldn't disagree more. We wouldn't have Spotify, Apple Music, Google Music, and a host of other halfway-decent services if Napster hadn't come first.
When the law does not respect the people, the people will not respect the law.
The question is how did a private company get a copyright on tax payer funded research. Who granted the copyright for data that was payed for by the tax payers? Well, it is the political establishment in one case that is trying to tie the hands of NIH funded research in private companies that required them to publicly release findings. Both Rep. and Dem. congress critters are introducing legislation that will remove this requirement and restrict any other agency to enforce this requirement. In other words, they will be granted a "copyright" to the material and we the people paid for it.
Indeed. I think this is one clear area where the government could (and should) step in and revoke Elsevier's copyrights. I don't think the current administration would actually do such a thing, but then again if Clinton had won she probably wouldn't either.
From the bottom of my heart: Fuck you!
I am a highly-cited scientist (in my field), but have diligently avoided publishing in, or refereeing articles for (by-rules for-free) any any Elsevier-owned journal – for the entirety of my entire career.
I also go to great pains to avoid citing anything that has appeared in an Elsevier scientific article. Surely the author said something similar somewhere else... or someone else said it...
Elsevier are Copyright-vultures feeding off the free labor and hard work of scientists the world-over.
It is due to the unfortunate tradition of basing tenure for scientists on the impact factor of the journals they publish their works in. Elsevier happens to own several high impact journals. Of course, for scientists at research universities where tenure is granted by fellow professor, a simple change of how the faculty evaluate new comers' work can eliminate most of the motivation to publish with an Elsevier journal.
Amen.
Elsevier's entire business model is based on restricting the spread of information and keeping the world stupider than it needs to be. It's time for them to be put out of business.
Emperor Trump, are you listening? Make America great again by smashing the filthy neofeudal parasites at Elsevier.
You have fundamental misunderstanding of what Elsevier does and why it does what it does. Elsevier does not pay the authors of the papers it publishes. What the authors get is access and scientific credit. For most scientists you have to publish papers to get credit and feedback from other scientists. Back before the internet Elsevier printed and bound and distributed scientific journals. They did this for papers that were approved by other scientists. Now most of this is done electronicly at a much lower cost. The editorial function of Elsevier remains. Many of the papers Elsevier publishes are actually the result government funded research. In the US government funded research papers can only be tied up for a limited time.
Similar disputes are occurring in the legal field within the US. The law can and is different in different countries. Elsevier is an expensive dinosaur which needs to change with the times.
They want money for 'damages?' Well I want access to the research that MY tax payer dollars payed for. These papers are not being stolen by Sci-Hub, they are being ransomed by the leeches at Elsevier. You can't steal something that is already rightfully belongs to you. These papers rightfully belong to the people. It's completely ridiculous that I or anyone else should have to pay money for a paper three decades old, or pay for something because their institution does not have that particular subscription, or pay for anything else that they already, through their taxes, paid for.
Fuck Elsevier. They are nothing more than a drain on the system. The free sharing of knowledge is one integral to the values of science. If promoting science, and getting what you are paid for, are piracy, then long live scientific piracy.