The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Researcher illegally shares millions of science papers free online to spread knowledge (12 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next]
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, JoeJoe wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
A publishing company can profit off of--wait for it--publishing! Owning the copyright to an article does not give patent rights, manufacturing privileges or anything like that. When publishers publish journals or books they have the legal right to sell them and they have legal protection of the reproduction of their products.

That is right - they own the paper they printed it on - period!! They do not own the research itself, therefore have no right to prevent anyone else from also publishing that research.

You clearly don't understand copyright.

The publisher doesn't own merely the paper. They own the right to publish the research. Nobody else has that right. If someone else publishes that research, they've violated the publisher's copyright.

Not quite. For instance, Elsevier allows research / data / results to be published elsewhere. You cannot just republish the same research paper effectively word for word elsewhere. But one certainly can reference and republish the results and data elsewhere. This is done all of the time.

https://www.elsevier.com/copyright

"Elsevier supports the need for authors to share, disseminate and maximize the impact of their research"

Authors "Retain patent, trademark and other intellectual property rights (including raw research data)"

But Elsevier certainly wants to be attributed.

See the link and its sublinks for all the details. Again, I have been published by Elsevier and have personal experience in these matters.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20290 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:

Do the people reading the magazines at the doctor's office have to pay the publisher for the privilege of being able to read the magazines their doctor paid for?? Of course not - duh.

-JoeJoe

One of the most ridiculous things you have ever written. And I must say that is a competitive title.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, JoeJoe wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, S2000magician wrote:
You clearly don't understand copyright.

The publisher doesn't own merely the paper. They own the right to publish the research. Nobody else has that right. If someone else publishes that research, they've violated the publisher's copyright.

You are the one that clearly doesn't understand. The publisher's publication is a COPY of the researcher's research. The RESEARCHER owns the right to allow that to be copied .... NOT the publisher.

Try to follow along here JoeJoe: the researcher has given the copyright to the publisher.

The researcher owns the research (or, more accurately, the entity that paid the researcher to do the research owns the research), but the publisher owns the copyright.
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, balducci wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, JoeJoe wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
A publishing company can profit off of--wait for it--publishing! Owning the copyright to an article does not give patent rights, manufacturing privileges or anything like that. When publishers publish journals or books they have the legal right to sell them and they have legal protection of the reproduction of their products.

That is right - they own the paper they printed it on - period!! They do not own the research itself, therefore have no right to prevent anyone else from also publishing that research.

You clearly don't understand copyright.

The publisher doesn't own merely the paper. They own the right to publish the research. Nobody else has that right. If someone else publishes that research, they've violated the publisher's copyright.

Not quite. For instance, Elsevier allows research / data / results to be published elsewhere. You cannot just republish the same research paper effectively word for word elsewhere. But one certainly can reference and republish the results and data elsewhere. This is done all of the time.

https://www.elsevier.com/copyright

"Elsevier supports the need for authors to share, disseminate and maximize the impact of their research"

Authors "Retain patent, trademark and other intellectual property rights (including raw research data)"

But Elsevier certainly wants to be attributed.

See the link and its sublinks for all the details. Again, I have been published by Elsevier and have personal experience in these matters.

It seems to me that your viewpoint should trump all others in this discussion.

That it doesn't is shameful.
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, S2000magician wrote:
It seems to me that your viewpoint should trump all others in this discussion.


Neither balducci nor Elsevier have the authority to write copyright laws, a court's viewpoint will be what trumps everything in this discussion.

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20290 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
You're joking right?

Courts since the inception of this country have written private property laws you do nor respect. Court means nothing to you.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
ed rhodes
View Profile
Inner circle
Rhode Island
2727 Posts

Profile of ed rhodes
Quote:
On Feb 13, 2016, tommy wrote:
First there is sympathy, then there is no sympathy, then there is
The lock upon my garden gate's a snail, that's what it is.


Wow, it's been a long time since I flashed on Donovon.

"There's no time to lose," I heard her say.
"Catch your dreams before they slip away."
"Dying all the time, lose your dreams and you could lose your mind.
Ain't life unkind?"
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4857 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
But Elsevier certainly wants to be attributed.

Uh, again, hard to give attribution to that which you can't access.
An abstract is simply not the same as the original article for research verification purposes.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
15958 Posts

Profile of tommy
In my view, if you sign a copyright transfer agreement to the publisher, then the publisher owns it. Moreover, I think they will try to get you to do just that and I would not sign it if I were you. JoeJoe, I think is one knows. It is a legal matter anyway and so better to speak to a lawyer about it, as opposed to a scientist or a magician.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, JoeJoe wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, S2000magician wrote:
It seems to me that your viewpoint should trump all others in this discussion.

Neither balducci nor Elsevier have the authority to write copyright laws, a court's viewpoint will be what trumps everything in this discussion.

Not surprisingly, you've completely misunderstood the conversation.

A court doesn't know whether a researcher transfers the copyright to their research to Elsevier.

A researcher who has had research published by Elsevier is likely to know whether the copyright is transferred.

Try to keep up.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20290 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Just remember all things are free. It is simply a matter of how many oranges it will cost you.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
15958 Posts

Profile of tommy
You Bill are the one that claimed that the publisher owns more than the paper without knowing if or not a copyright transfer agreement had been signed. Without evidence of a copyright transfer we must assume that there is none and all the publisher owns is the paper.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4857 Posts

Profile of landmark
Copyright transfer is pretty standard in this kind of thing. Kind of like The Magic Café. Agree or don't play.
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, tommy wrote:
You Bill are the one that claimed that the publisher owns more than the paper without knowing if or not a copyright transfer agreement had been signed. Without evidence of a copyright transfer we must assume that there is none and all the publisher owns is the paper.

I was relying on the testimony from balducci and John.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
15958 Posts

Profile of tommy
So were many who have now frozen to death. Smile
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4857 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, balducci wrote:
Another article about Sci-Hub here:

http://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/a-pirate-bay-for-science


Quote:
"Why would any self-respecting researcher willingly hand over, for nothing, the copyright to their hard work to an organization that will profit from the work by making the keys prohibitively expensive to the few people who want to read it? The answer is ultimately all to do with career prospects and prestige. Researchers are rewarded in jobs and promotions for publishing in high-ranking journals such as Nature.

Ironically, it is becoming increasingly common for researchers to be unable to access even their own published work, as wealthier and wealthier universities join the ranks of those unable to pay rising subscription fees. Another tragic irony is the fact that high-impact journals can actually be less reliable than lesser-ranked journals, due to their requirements that researchers publish startling results, which can lead to a higher incidence of fraud and bad research practices"
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, tommy wrote:
You Bill are the one that claimed that the publisher owns more than the paper without knowing if or not a copyright transfer agreement had been signed. Without evidence of a copyright transfer we must assume that there is none and all the publisher owns is the paper.

I was relying on the testimony from balducci and John.


As usual he shoots from the hip based on mis-leading headlines and his own bias, and not on the actual content of the conversation. I'm used to it. Smile



Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:
Courts since the inception of this country have written private property laws you do nor respect. Court means nothing to you.


The courts have never ever written a single law one in the entire history of this country ... laws are written by people, and those people are called "legislators".

And they do not write the laws on behalf of private corporations. They write laws on behalf of other people, those people are called "citizens".



Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, S2000magician wrote:
Try to follow along here JoeJoe: the researcher has given the copyright to the publisher.


Correction: the researcher has given *A* copyright to the publisher ... not *THE* copyright. The publisher is not allowed to have an exclusive copyright on research material, which is what Elsevier is trying to claim. Their attempts to extort this right from researchers is an illegal racketeering scam.

The entity that paid the researcher is also being extorted here, not just the researcher. It would be like Steve Brooks telling us that if we make a post here, we are not allowed to post it anywhere else. No ... if you make a post here, you still own the original copyright and have every authority to post it elsewhere.

And that is exactly what Elsevier is doing - sending take-down notices to the original researcher demanding they remove their own content from other sites:

Quote:
http://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/a-pirate-bay-for-science

Elsevier is perhaps most notorious for delivering takedown notices to academics, demanding them to take their own research published with Elsevier off websites like Academia.edu.


Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, landmark wrote:
Copyright transfer is pretty standard in this kind of thing. Kind of like The Magic Café. Agree or don't play.


Can you imagine the uproar if Steve Brooks started sending users take-down notices for posts they made at the Genii forums?? Laughable at best. Like I said, if I were judge I'd lock-up the entire upper management of Elsevier for filing a frivolous lawsuit. They have no authority to tell a researcher they can't publish their own research.

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4857 Posts

Profile of landmark
From the Magic Café splash page:

"All contents & postings Copyright © 2001 - 2016 Steve Brooks-All Rights Reserved."

Now, I suspect that if I posted a dupe over at Genii, 1) I could claim fair use, and 2) The fine folks who run The Magic Café would not want to look like doofuses. So no problem on that score.

But...let's say I wanted to sell an ebook, "The Complete landmark Files," with all my posts. I think if they wanted to, they could stop me.

OTOH, what I really want to know is, what are my rights if I want to sell an ebook of "The Complete Censored landmark," all 30,472 of my deleted posts?
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
On Feb 16, 2016, landmark wrote:
But...let's say I wanted to sell an ebook, "The Complete landmark Files," with all my posts. I think if they wanted to, they could stop me.


No they could not - the movie industry already learned they can't just write their own copyright laws when they tried to tell Blockbuster they would not allowed to rent their movies.

If you give someone a right to copy something, you still own the original copy. In order for them to have an exclusive, you would have to give them the actual something (the research) - not just the right to copy it.

Elsevier only has a right to copy their copy of the research, they do not own the actual research and can not claim the researcher that did the research is in violation of "their" copyright by publishing his own research elsewhere.

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Researcher illegally shares millions of science papers free online to spread knowledge (12 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.21 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL