From: Michael Magoulias <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 16:44:42 +0000

Hi Ann,

I want to thank you for this important post which raises essential
questions and also leaves the door open to the possibility that at
least a few publishers have not sprung from the loins of Beelzebub.

At heart, much of the discussion about OA, article sharing networks,
and SciHub revolves around whether copyright as currently embodied in
law is ethical. The assumption that it isn't, and therefore breaking
the law is ok, seems to be the knee-jerk reaction of many. This is the
"law is a ass" school of living dangerously. Even those who should be
more thoughtful with their pronouncements to the media -- and SPARC
tends to be particularly irresponsible in this regard -- appear to
support this view.

Simply because it is such a default position makes it worth exploring
further. We're dealing with an area where there are legitimate goals
and values that can be at odds with each other. We are also dealing
with a legal framework that has emerged from a very specific set of
historical circumstances regarding property rights and the impact of
discrete technologies on the spread of knowledge. This link to an
article by the philosopher Mark Alfino from 1991 has been very useful
to me in understanding our current predicament, and I hope other
readers of this list find it valuable as well. (The article was posted
by the author on his website, so I have every reason to believe that I
am respecting copyright by reproducing this link. How embarrassing it
would be otherwise….)

http://guweb2.gonzaga.edu/faculty/alfino/dossier/Papers/COPYRIGH.htm

Thanks,
Michael