From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 18:19:49 -0500
Further to Jean-Claude's message below re. Sci-hub's actions as civil
disobedience: yes, Sci-hub does break the law, in this case copyright
laws (of most nations).
Am I the only librarian who's troubled by "the devil made me do it"
argument that a number of library people are advancing here (the devil
in this case being the publisher(s))?
For example, from a recent SPARC interview: "Well, I think
researchers take for granted that they're - they've been forced into a
system of workarounds to try to get access to the articles that they
need to do their research."
So, when a scientist/scholar could go to an eprints site, or library
doc delivery/ILL services, or ask colleagues for copies (and other
long-standing legitimate ways of security access to those works that
aren't locally available) does that qualify as "being forced" to
something that makes breaking the law preferable? "Driven" is another
word I've seen.
Do we as librarians really believe that large-scale copyright
infringement is a good thing, that it's right, and a means to a better
future?
Ann Okerson
**********
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Ann Okerson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 7:41 PM
> Subject: Re: SciHub (was: Elsevier cracks down on pirated articles)
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> From: "Guédon Jean-Claude" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 20:34:28 +0000
>
> A couple of quick points:
>
> 1. OA does not collide with copyright. Sci-hub is not OA; it is civil
> disobedience (http://bjoern.brembs.net/2016/02/sci-hub-as-necessary-effective-civil-disobedience/);
>
> 2. The notion of sustainability is very slippery. If it means finding
> stable financing, including public stable financing, I I have no
> objection. If it means finding a way to recover costs or, worse, make
> profits, then I object.
>
> As far as scientific publishing is concerned, copyright is needed only
> to the extent that it is needed to make CC-by work. Without copyright,
> there is obviously no need for a licensing scheme.
>
> Jean-Claude Guédon
|
