Slashdot Mirror
Sci-Hub 'Pirate Bay For Scientists' Sued by American Chemical Society Over Cloned Site (ibtimes.co.uk)
The American Chemistry Society (ACS) is now suing Sci-Hub, the so-called "Pirate Bay for Scientists," over copyright infringement and counterfeiting, and is asking the courts to grant an injunction against the website in the US. From a report: Following the news that academic publisher Elsevier won a legal judgement of $15m in damages against Sci-Hub for allowing people to illegally download peer-reviewed academic papers for free, the world's largest scientific society ACS has filed its own lawsuit in the state of Virginia against the website. ACS is complaining that in addition to making hundreds of thousands of research papers owned by the society freely available, Sci-Hub has also cloned its website and is infringing its trademarks by operating two almost-identical replicas of the ACS website at pubs.acs.org.sci-hub.cc and acs.org.secure.sci-hub.cc.
Go them!
It should be noted that the judgement Elsvier won was a default judgement because SciHub didn't appear... because they aren't a US entity.
We pay our taxes. We want our money's worth. Give us our free science. NOW!
Pirate Bay for Scientists
This is the one time scientists get some booty.
There's the CAS, for example. Here, we have a scientific society that works against the best interests of its members.
These guys should be happy that someone wants to do hosting duty for all these papers, which should definitely be accessible by the public which it impacts.
Those who monopolize and restrict information only do so in an attempt to control and abuse others. It's good to see that a collective in Russia, a Nation every bit as brutal and fascist as America has pockets of resistance and people who stand to preserve the knowledge for all mankind
Because the World is about to engage into a full on world ware lie we've never seen, multiple conflicts across multiple theaters and the US being controlled like a puppet by Putin, meaning the Alt-Right WILL beginning open persecution of the Mexicans, Muslims and the Lefties right here in America. And when mass protests erupt and things start looking like they are coming to a head, Martial Law will be declared and many millions of backs will be against the Great Wall of Mexico
If you can take out loans to pay your tuition and buy your books, then you can damn well pay the ACS for their knowledge horde.
The real question is: Why would any respectable researcher deal with these bandits?
MAGA!
Make America Great Again!
This is very intriguing... but I can't find the evidence that the "release" of the information contributed to "degradation" of the research itself... or is this about the monetary compensation for the release?
Because yeah... the results of science must be pay-walled or recompensated from the public!
pffft
I still do not believe what Sci-Hub does is legitimately piracy. Piracy is downloading something you did not pay for. If my tax dollars already paid for the institutional overhead, the scientist's salary, and the grant money, downloading the paper is merely getting what I am owed. Those who monetize science are the real pirates, demanding money for access to that which was created with our tax dollars, charging universities obscene fees for the privilege of allowing their students to read it, and denying scientists and students in poorer countries access to important research.
I've had issues getting papers from the 50's thanks to this outrageous copyright business...the publishers claim to somehow be of benefit to science, and that Sci-Hub harms science, but tell me, how does that benefit science, and how does allowing me or anyone else harm it?
Copyright be damned, suing them is like suing a cop who returns stolen property because it cuts into the thief's profits. I'm a scientist, and I say long live Sci-Hub.
The general consensus was, whether i2p, tor, or another network, this data needs to be mirrored again, but this time it needs to be mirrored outside of a clearnet website, unable to be blocked by domain seizure, ip address blocking, or any other form of traceable legacy platform utilization.
If you agree, pick a network and start doing your part to mirror content today. Between the limited size of the networks, Windows 10 telemetry, and TrustZone/Management Engine proto-backdoors, who knows how long we will have, but now is the time to make a stand if you believe in freedom of information, limited life of copyright, and the need for society to collectively advance outside of the bounds of greed of the 'chosen few'.
Rebel today, or the freedom to rebel tomorrow will be taken from you!
Scientific research should always be open access. Why does some greedy company think it can make a business around milking academics. Government needs to legislate to shut this scammer down, and ensure continued free access for scientists.
For the record, the ACS is a shill for the chemical manufacturers and pharma. They give jack shit for the practicing chemist.
How many researchers are going to drop ACS membership because of this?
A lot of journals allow self-archiving, sometimes of published, sometimes of 'author's last' version. It's an underused mechanism.
Until then...As for Sci Hub...it's a response to the idiocies of the current system and the amazing costs of the established journals, and it is right that more publicly funded research gets to more people. It is a blunt instrument, though, with drawbacks:
(1) Not all the research is taxpayer funded. This is a crude instrument. Even if you accept the 'taxpayer funded' argument as a basis for considering this behaviour ethical, if they put out anything that was privately funded, that is still ethically theft.
(2) The 'it's taxpayer funded' argument is nice, but at least logically, the conclusion is that US taxpayer funded research should be available to US taxpayers, UK to UK taxpayers, etc. The argument is really not logically valid as it stands. You still need to invoke altruism (US funds it and gives to the world). Science needs to be globally available, not just to the country where it was done.
(3) Giving away other people's stuff is all well and good until you run out of other people's work to publish. Elsevier and and those, yes, they make a lot of money where they really shouldn't. But these papers _are_ peer reviewed through the Elsevier mechanism. So Elsevier _do_ add some value over and above what the scientists and taxpayers provide. Not as much as they charge for it via subscriptions, but some. So until Sci Hub are paying for some of the cost of managing the peer review they _are_ thieves.
(4) Pragmatism does not make it right. Desirable does not make it right. 'Cos I want it' does not make it right. 'Cos I like free stuff' does not make it right. Just makes it pragmatic and desirable. Buying goods you know to be stolen is still dodgy.
Pierce the corporate veil and prosecute its executives.
ACS's financials require continued growth of its revenues. Its billion plus endowment and its half a billion in annual revenues are not growing as fast as its gold-standard retirement plan costs. It is experiencing 2% a year membership decline. It is facing bankruptcy in 20 to 30 years and is institutionally incapable of adapting to having a smaller role in publishing. It is way easier for their executives to file an ineffective lawsuit than it is for them to map out a future for themselves where publishing revenues are a fraction of today's revenues. It has a lot in common with cities that have too many pensioners and shrinking populations.
Thanks American Chemistry Society. I had no idea, until your lawsuit pointed it out, that these sites existed. Time to start browsing through publicly funded research!
Warning! Keep Out of Eyes! Wash Out with Water! Don't Drink Soap! Dilute! Dilute!
We need to organize a massive boycott of the ACS, and see chemists and others all across academia cancelling their memberships over this. If this disgusting organization isn't going to support science and scientists, they then can all go fuck themselves.
Go to Reddit, if you want heavy moderation. You obviously don't understand the culture here, and would be better served elsewhere. It is okay, the culture here isn't for everyone. It is not inclusive. It is not a safe space. It is not heavily moderated, even for off-topic posts.
If it were those things, most of us would leave. If you want it to be those things, you should leave. That's not pejorative, it is just factual. You will be happier elsewhere.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Go to Reddit, if you want heavy moderation. You obviously don't understand the culture here, and would be better served elsewhere. It is okay, the culture here isn't for everyone. It is not inclusive. It is not a safe space. It is not heavily moderated, even for off-topic posts.
If it were those things, most of us would leave. If you want it to be those things, you should leave. That's not pejorative, it is just factual. You will be happier elsewhere.
I don't normally make "Me too!" type posts. But I really, really think you deserve a FUCK YEAH! It's nice to see someone articulate the truth in whatever form that may take. Great job.