From: Jan Velterop <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 23:55:15 +0100

What Sci-Hub does is no-doubt against existing law. But framing it as a
“Marxist attempt to destroy capitalism” is quite an exaggerated
characterisation. It could also be framed as a resistance movement
objecting to much that’s perceived as wrong with scholarly communication,
particularly restricting access to scientific knowledge as a privilege for
the wealthy instead of making it freely accessible as a common good for the
world.

Framing it as such, as a protest against injustice, will inevitably accept
that illegal action may well be part of it, as it often is in such
circumstances. Civil disobedience and actions that are considered illegal
are inherent in most protest against injustice.

If you’re into exaggerated comparisons, you may even compare it with, for
instance, the actions of the colonies in the American revolution against
the then existing law. Without those illegal actions the colonies would not
have achieved the changes that led to their independence.

Johannes (Jan) J M Velterop


On 9 Dec 2018, at 20:45, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

From: SANFORD G THATCHER <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2018 09:25:07 -0500

Thanks for reposting this earlier article. What it argues, of course, is
that
most of the harm comes by way of hacking, not the donation of access codes,
but
it does not deny that some of it comes about via donation.  The article does
not, however, attempt to quantify what percentage each activity contributes.

I hope that people are aware that Elbakyan is not just acting to free up
scholarly resources. As a true Marxist zealot, she wants to see the entire
capitalist system destroyed and replaced by a Marxian utopia reflecting the
motto :From each according to his abilities, to each according to his
needs."

Let's not kid ourselves that she just wants to champion open access within
an
overall free-market system. Rather, she wants to see that system entirely
uprooted and destroyed forever.  Anyone who voluntarily donates access
codes in
the belief that Elbakyan is just a champion of liberty is sadly mistaken.

I base this characterization on an interview Elbakyan gave to an audience
attending an open-access conference at the University of North Texas a few
years ago.

Sandy Thatcher


On Fri, Dec  7, 2018 08:00 AM LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>From: Debbie <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2018 10:46:23 +0000
>
>That’s not what the evidence suggests…
>
>
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/09/18/guest-post-think-sci-hub-is-just-downloading-pdfs-think-again/
>
>Debbie Wilton
>
>PSI Ltd
>Tel: +44 (0) 1865 849514
>
>
>From: SANFORD G THATCHER <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 21:44:22 -0500
>
>The article refers to the authentications as "stolen," but isn't it true
>that many of the access codes are given to Sci-Hub freely by cooperating
>academics?
>
>Sandy Thatcher
>
>On Wed, Dec  5, 2018 09:04 PM LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>From: "Jim O'Donnell" <[log in to unmask]>
>>Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 12:18:34 -0700
>>
>>The intra-FSU politics of Sci-Hub have been the subject of speculation
>>before (
>>
>
https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/8/16985666/alexandra-elbakyan-sci-hub-open-access-science-papers-lawsuit
>),
>>with Elbakyan's presumed residence in Russia complicating the hypothetical
>>narratives.  She was interviewed in the propaganda film *Paywall*, but was
>>not asked questions that would clarify the funding, control, and operation
>>of Sci-Hub.  Now today, this news, presumably a complication:
>>
>
https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/sci-hub-blocked-in-russia-following-ruling-by-moscow-court/3009838.article#.XAWkzt3kPek.twitter
>>
>>Jim O'Donnell
>>ASU