From: Kathleen Folger <[log in to unmask]> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:05:37 -0400 Individuals who respond to these requests probably have access to the articles due to their affiliation with an institution which has a license governing the terms of use. Most licenses do allow for what is referred to as scholarly sharing which is described in the Liblicense model license as: Authorized Users may transmit to a third party colleague, in paper or electronically, reasonable amounts of the Licensed Materials for personal, scholarly, educational, scientific, or research uses, but in no case for resale. An individual at an institution occasionally providing copies of articles in response to an #icanhazpdf would seem to fall within such terms of use. Note: opinions are my own, IANAL, YMMV and all other Internet caveats apply. There was an interesting analysis of the use of the #icanhazpdf hashtag at ACRL in Portland. The paper is available at: http://eprints.rclis.org/24847/2/gardner.pdf. Here were a few highlights from the article: * There were 824 requests for material over a 4 month period * The greatest number of requests came from users in the US and UK * 34.5% of the requests were for articles published that year; 56.4% published in the most recent 5 years * 3/4 of the users only used the hashtag once in the 4 months * 62% of requests were for articles in life sciences & medicine; 13% in physical medicine; 13% in technology; 11% in social sciences; 1% in arts & humanities -Kathleen _________________________________________ Kathleen M. Folger, Electronic Resources Officer University of Michigan Library 312 Hatcher North Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1190 [log in to unmask] On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 8:18 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 18:47:13 -0500 > > I suspect this work-around might run afoul of the law because it is > someone else than the author sharing the article. Stevan Harnad has > long recommended the practice of people who want access to an article > writing directly to the author and asking for a copy. a practice that > reflects the long tradition of scholars sending their articles to > other scholars when asked by them to do so. Courts often give > deference to such traditional practices, and it is why I believe > Harnard's suggestion is probably safe to follow. I'm much less sure > about a system of widespread sharing like this that is specifically > aimed at replacing publisher fees. > > Sandy Thatcher > > > > From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]> > > Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 19:17:47 -0400 > > > > Many readers have seen these pieces making the rounds today. Do folks > > regard this practice as hacking or as normal scholarly sharing of > > single articles? Why? > > > > http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-34572462 > > > > http://qz.com/528526/academics-have-found-a-way-to-access-insanely-expensive-research-papers-for-free/ > > > > "Scientists are tweeting a link of the paywalled article along with > > their email address in the hashtag-a riff on the infamous meme of a > > fluffy cat's "I Can Has Cheezburger?" line. Someone else who does have > > access to the article downloads a pdf of the paper and emails the file > > to the person requesting it. The initial tweet is then deleted as soon > > as the requester receives the file."