From: SANFORD G THATCHER <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 00:12:16 -0500

Cannot much the same argument be made about open access itself, viz., that
there is no one platform from which one may obtain all or most OA content
through the same simple procedures? So is this not just as much a problem for
OA as for TA publishing?

And if the convenience of having most everything accessible through just one
source is an argument in its favor, then why not defend the Napsters of the
world too? Does it make a difference that in Sci-Hub's case the authors don't
get paid for publishing whereas the musicians harmed by Napster did?

Sandy Thatcher


On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 07:18 PM LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>From: adam hodgkin <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:56:49 +0100
>
>I am sure that I will be shouted at for being an apologist for
>Sci-Hub, and probably much worse. But please note, before you shout,
>that I do not approve of Sci-Hub's mode of operation or the
>justifications that Elabkyan offers.
>
>But. But ... It seems to me that Sci-Hub has one great advantage which
>puts all the main scholarly/scientific article platforms in a bad
>place. It has a simple user interface, a straightforward database, and
>(an arguably over-simple) re-use policy which is hugely attractive to
>users. So it is very hard to see how the mainstream subscription
>platforms, quirkily designed, and by ownership divided, can answer
>that. The simplicity arises  because almost everything (I exaggerate,
>but a great deal of the most relevant stuff) is accessible and
>searchable in one place. And the re-use restrictions are almost
>completely liberal -- because the restrictions are almost
>non-existent.
>
>If the web had evolved in such a way that different bundles of the web
>were only searchable from different domains: if Indian content, that
>is content from Indian domains, had to be searched by an Indian search
>engine, European content by a European search engine, Chinese by a
>Chinese search engine and American content by Alta Vista or Inktomi,
>etc, imagine with what relief all users would land upon a newly
>invented Google that allowed us to search and then navigate to all web
>content from all continents and domains from one place.
>
>This point may not direct us towards a next step for scientific and
>scholarly publishing, but it may underline the fact that the
>traditional vehicles for publishing, deploying, searching and
>archiving scholarly content are not operating at web-scale. For all
>its defects disengenuity and deficiencies, Sci-Hub is.
>
>If the traditional publishers cannot find a solution to this problem
>perhaps Gates Foundation, CZI and Alphabet will?
>
>Adam Hodgkin
>
>www.exacteditions.com
>and my book Following Searle on Twitter
>http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/F/bo25370730.html
>
>On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 2:54 AM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> From: "Hinchliffe, Lisa W" <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 01:28:20 +0000
>>
>> The Verge is the tech/media outlet of Vox Media.  I am personally more
>> familiar with and fan of their Eater (food/restaurants) outlet but
>> that's a more personal interest than profesional. :)
>>
>> See https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/vox-media for their funding....
>>
>> Lisa
>>
>> --
>> Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe
>> Professor/ Coordinator for Information Literacy Services and Instruction
>> University Library, University of Illinois, 1408 West Gregory Drive,
>> Urbana, Illinois 61801
>> [log in to unmask], 217-333-1323 (v), 217-244-4358 (f)