Slashdot Mirror
US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub (torrentfreak.com)
Sci-Hub, a scientific research piracy site home to thousands of research papers, has suffered another blow in a U.S. federal court. According to TorrentFreak, "The American Chemical Society has won a default judgment of $4.8 million for alleged copyright infringement against the site. In addition, the publisher was granted an unprecedented injunction which requires search engines and ISPs to block the platform." This comes after a $15 million fine was imposed on Sci-Hub by a New York federal judge earlier this year. From the report: Just before the weekend, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema issued a final decision which is a clear win for ACS. The publisher was awarded the maximum statutory damages of $4.8 million for 32 infringing works, as well as a permanent injunction. The injunction is not limited to domain name registrars and hosting companies, but expands to search engines, ISPs and hosting companies too, who can be ordered to stop linking to or offering services to Sci-Hub. The injunction means that Internet providers, such as Comcast, can be requested to block users from accessing Sci-Hub. That's a big deal since pirate site blockades are not common in the United States. The same is true for search engine blocking of copyright-infringing sites.
"Ordered that any person or entity in active concert or participation with Defendant Sci-Hub and with notice of the injunction, including any Internet search engines, web hosting and Internet service providers, domain name registrars, and domain name registries, cease facilitating access to any or all domain names and websites through which Sci-Hub engages in unlawful access to, use, reproduction, and distribution of ACS's trademarks or copyrighted works," the injunction reads.
"Ordered that any person or entity in active concert or participation with Defendant Sci-Hub and with notice of the injunction, including any Internet search engines, web hosting and Internet service providers, domain name registrars, and domain name registries, cease facilitating access to any or all domain names and websites through which Sci-Hub engages in unlawful access to, use, reproduction, and distribution of ACS's trademarks or copyrighted works," the injunction reads.
So the only people that cant freely benefit from these U.S. science papers are U.S. citizens.
"His name was James Damore."
Bite Me! do these individuals know how the internet works?
;)
I know, I am just an old curmudgeon
It's a great place to get access to all sorts of scientific journals.
Cant stop , wont stop.
On the other hand I see a whole new generation of fledglings incentivized to use VPNs and surfs the darcwep
Shouldn't we be sharing knowledge so that as many people as possible can innovate? If you want to profit from an idea, that's what a patent is for.
Doesn't availability and accessibility increase the utility of the knowledge? Am I missing something here?
Isn't this one of the main reasons the internet was invented? To share knowledge.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Sci-hub is on tor
scihub22266oqcxt.onion
So I guess this court action will result in a whole new group of people getting on tor.
time to defeat these asshat judges.
The law is written by politicians and it's backed by force. Just because you don't think it's right doesn't mean squat. Run afoul of it and you will likely be sanctioned, especially when money is at stake and your opponents have deep pockets. Aaron Swartz realized this too late, when the law credibly threatened to put him in jail for decades, and he decided end his existence on his own terms instead.
Until you can convince a politician that you can personally benefit him, those that can (lobbyists - professional persuaders), and those that can bring money and votes to his benefit, he's not going to pay you a lick of attention. And seriously, how many outside of the academic community care about this? A handful of angry post-baccalaureates sure isn't going to persuade any pol to switch sides.
It's absurd that taxpayer funded research, done ostensibly for the advancement of society, is not available publicly. But it's the law. And until you can change the law, you're pissing into the dark. And somewhere in the dark is an electrified fence.
Try and change the law. But follow it until you can change it, cause brother, it got teeth. And it don't care what you think of it.
Can it block YaCy? I mean, c'mon! We have to get around this shit somehow!
We already paid for this research you cocksuckers. In the past, when this fact was pointed out, your response was that it costs money to host these things. Well, somebody figured out a way to do it without your bullshit 2nd and 3rd taxes on public funded information. Just kill yourselves.
Can it block YaCy? I mean, c'mon! We have to get around this shit somehow!
...and rely on the nerds seeking it to apply your edicts. Fucking morons.
For all the reasons I explained in my post when the magistrate judge's decision came out, this order likely cannot apply to ISPs, search engines, etc., because they weren't involved in the lawsuit (i.e., didn't have their proverbial day in court), and aren't in "active concert or participation" with Sci-Hub.
Sure enough, the actual decision here says: "ORDERED that any person or entity in active concert or participation with Defendant Sci-Hub and with notice of the injunction, including [basically every player involved in providing internet services], cease facilitating access...."
This is basically like saying "everyone to whom the injunction applies must obey it (if ACS can prove they knew about it)," which pretty much says nothing.
First, no individual ISP, search provider, DNS provider, etc. etc. is obligated to do anything until ACS provides them with legal notice of the injunction or otherwise proves they actually saw it (ACS can't just say "Your Honor, it's been all over the news -- they HAD to have heard about it").
Second, ACS would have to show that the party was not just agnostically providing access to / search results for / DNS records for / etc., Sci-Hub just like any other website, but that the party was actually colluding with Sci-Hub. ACS would be very unlikely to be able to do this in my view, and it would be expensive for them to try (some of the smaller players might just fold to avoid the bother, but the larger ones are unlikely to want to set a precedent of just rolling over and implying they're subject to a court order in a case to which they were not a party and had no opportunity to defend their interests).
In short, any blocking would be strictly voluntary, and I'd be fairly surprised if we see a whole lot of that.
The law is written by politicians and it's backed by force. Just because you don't think it's right doesn't mean squat. Run afoul of it and you will likely be sanctioned, especially when money is at stake and your opponents have deep pockets. Aaron Swartz realized this too late, when the law credibly threatened to put him in jail for decades, and he decided end his existence on his own terms instead.
Until you can convince a politician that you can personally benefit him, those that can (lobbyists - professional persuaders), and those that can bring money and votes to his benefit, he's not going to pay you a lick of attention. And seriously, how many outside of the academic community care about this? A handful of angry post-baccalaureates sure isn't going to persuade any pol to switch sides.
It's absurd that taxpayer funded research, done ostensibly for the advancement of society, is not available publicly. But it's the law. And until you can change the law, you're pissing into the dark. And somewhere in the dark is an electrified fence.
Try and change the law. But follow it until you can change it, cause brother, it got teeth. And it don't care what you think of it.
Yet many of the same scientists and the same university libraries that decry the barriers to access of the pay-to-play journals still feed the monster. Yes, yes, "publish or parish", and the library "must" carry these subscriptions. Or something like that.
The key will be to establish "open source" peer-reviewed journals that are backed by the biggest names in science and the major universities. That at this point it hasn't happened makes me think that the biggest names in science and the major universities like the way things are now...
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Don't be an asshat that puts your research behind a paywall. Then all the above comments don't have to happen. Thought all the liberal types who ultimately become scientists didn't believe in money in the first place. Or do you just believe in it when it's YOUR money?
Just shut the fuck up, will ya?
The day when I will pay for a mere copy of the result (information) of somebody's one-time-paid hard work,
is the day when I can also pay with a mere copy of the result (money) of my one-time-paid hard work. It’s only fair.
No? You don't want to play it that way around? Then excuse me, while I call you a "sea-faring rapist thug" and sue you for FIFTY TRILLION DOLLARS too.
Once again it is dissapointing that only those wealthy enough to be able to afford subscriptions can be privy to information. Knowledge should be for all. If you don't want anyone to know about, don't write about it. and sadly not all smart people are rich, so why should they be penalized.
Further more, the people making the money aren't the people who did the work, or wrote the paper and they aren't interested in the information contained there-in, but only in charging others to view it. Surely, that in itself, is piracy... selling something that you didn't create or pay for, at the very least they are no different to patent trolls, acquiring something they don't want to use and didn't create, but charging others who actually want to do something with it.
Until we leave behind our greed and learn to share we will always live in the dark ages.
or was that corporate profits?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
One of the only reasons Public Us get any funding anymore is so businesses can swoop in, take the research and profit from it. Unless you can somehow get the public at large to stop voting against the tax cuts and voting for the wars that defund education (good luck) then it's going to have to be a for profit enterprise.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Time for a game of whack-a-website!
An ignominious judge sez: "Scientific knowledge is a prerogative of the rich and well connected. Those who cannot pay must remain in ignorance. IT'S DUH LAW!!!1!!"
Every few years Senator Cornyn (R Texas) introduces a bill requiring federally funded research to be made available to freely online. Every few years, the fine folks who post on Slashdot ignore the bill, as does everyone else other than the publishers who oppose it. Every few years the bill dies with no broad support from the public.
Next time Senator Cornyn introduces the bill, please send a quick email or phone call to your senators and house reps, supporting the bill. Thanks.
That is changing in the rest of the world. It was a matter of time until the rich and powerful made the USA obey: It was, likely, started by the USA.
I mean, today google pretend they have not to block the result the EU court want blocked, so what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and if you go on EU search engines the article will be in the search results... Right ? Because anything else would be the height of hypocrisy.
All the people interested in technical papers and willing to rely on a let's say not official source like this do already know about Sci-Hub. The site does have its own search functionality and, in principle, there is no need to rely on search engines or in any other external resource to browse through their own information.
On the other hand, that blockade might affect Sci-Hub in case they didn't develop their own search and relied on an existing search-engine, what is a surprisingly common approach. Bear in mind that most of websites including a relevant number of contents use databases which, basically, are search engines. Even if you want to make things really cheap, simple and quick, you could build a simple form directly communicating with the in-built search engine of the given database (don't forget about SQL injection!!!).
Renouncing to (or, at least, blindly trusting for-profit companies, whose businesses aren't precisely objectivity and technical correctness, to make the right decisions) privacy, reliability or similar and getting something on exchange might be justifiable. Performing these actions by default and getting even worse results seems quite stupid. No idea what Sci-Hub has done on this front, but there are quite a few sites performing such nonsensical actions; and I am not just talking about small websites where searching is a secondary concern. It is almost scary how much power certain companies/data sources have got mostly through laziness and undeserved blind trust.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
Learn to use frigate browser extension (or other ways to bypass blocking): https://fri-gate.org/
American continent is not Euro-Russian continent. American judgements are entirely insignificant on Russian soil. BTW: Proxies anyone? Hehehe.....
You were wondering why the US, which was the absolute leader in science and technology until not that long ago, is falling behind in technology and why insane ideas like flat earth, hollow earth or creationism that are subject to ridicule or the plot of silly comedies at best outside "God's own country" can be taken serious and even taught at schools (in science classes, not classes dealing with mythology)?
Now, this is certainly not the only reason. But a good display of what's wrong here.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Didn't know about this site, thanks ACS. Sincerely, a VPN-equipped non-research scientist American.
Lots and lots of researchers have been making their work separately available on arXiv for many years. The coverage is not 100% of published research, but I recently attended a conference and virtually all of the papers presented were posted to arXiv and a link was provided. Seems to me that the days of sequestered and economically controlled/distributed research are very much limited.
Maybe they could upload everything onto Archive.org?
Maybe they should publish the material on a censor-proof blockchain like LBRY https://lbry.io/
1. I will think twice before submitting to any journal of American Chemical Society or Elsevier. As long as I can ignore the litigators without hurting my research group's publications too much, I will. (This means no longer publishing in Elsevier's glorious Journal of Modern Optics. Good riddance.)
2. Long live sci-hub. I use it daily, for convenience. I recomment it to collaborators who are not yet aware of it. (My universitiy's library has subscriptions, but it takes time to VPN and login and respond to requests.)
3. I now budget open-access fees into my grant applications.
Problem solved. Next obsolete technology, please.
17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
The judge intentionally wrote an order that they know is unenforceable. ACS wins the battle, SciHub wins the war.