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]
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, JoeJoe wrote:
Again false ... SciHub was setup by researchers ... Scihub is being run by researchers ... the lawsuit being filed is against researchers.


I can add that the access keys used by Scihub to access the research in the first place were provided by "anonymous donors" who are most likely researchers themselves, so the idea that this data was illegally download is a total crock-of-crap as Elsevier was indeed paid.

It was "donated" to the researchers by someone anonymously.

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Ok JoeJoe, at least I know where you stand. If I submit my paper to an academic journal of my choosing. The paoer passes oeer review and meets editorial standards. And the publisher then publishes my paper, that's bad. But after publication, if a researcher I've never met obtains a copy of my paper and puts it on SciHub without my consent, then that's good.

Is this what you believe?
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20295 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
His position as usual seems to be that everyone should own everything so there is never any theft. We suspend all private property rights.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
15959 Posts

Profile of tommy
Open access is unrestricted online access to peer-reviewed scholarly research more or less and many pure open access journals do charge an article processing fee. One must buy a journal, a newspaper or whatever and so nothing is really free. In short public access is not the same as free access.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27083 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
What is the study / repeat study verification history of the data they publish?

The copyright on the journal article seems a straightforward claim.

The other access side could work with all the documents that comprise the data and exclude the formal journal article text. Treat that as black box / relic in a case and work around it in open discussion. By analogy sailing to India by going east...

Probably easier to take the first approach as verification path. But excluding the text and including all the study documents to get to the thesis and findings may also work. After a few duplication failures a more honest dialog can commence.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:
His position as usual seems to be that everyone should own everything so there is never any theft. We suspend all private property rights.


What I said is the information was never "illegally" downloaded from Elsevier's servers - it was legally downloaded thanks to "anonymous donors". The author's spin on this article is inaccurate, starting with his comparison to Pirate Bay.

In order for it to have been illegally downloaded, someone would have had to have broken into Elsevier's computers and downloaded the research without actually paying Elsevier for it ... that never happened, they received payment for each and every article ever published at Sci-hub thanks to "anonymous donors".

We basically have a non-profit information hub for professionals; if you started a research company and paid Elsevier for a research article, all of your employees would be able to access said research article. There is no violation of the "system" here.

What I said was that just because Elsevier published someone's research does not give them world-wide exclusive license to that research to the extent that even the researcher that did the research can then no longer be legally allowed to re-publish the research elsewhere.

Because that is exactly what Elsevier is claiming - that if a researcher publishes the cure for AIDS through them, they then own that research outright and everyone else in the world (including the original researcher) must then pay them whatever they charge for it.

The human population is not going to allow that - only an idiot would agree to it.

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Think of it like this: a book publisher is trying to sue the public library because people can read books for free at the library.

Too ******* bad, deal with it *****. Smile

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, JoeJoe wrote:
Think of it like this: a book publisher is trying to sue the public library because people can read books for free at the library.

Too ******* bad, deal with it *****. Smile

-JoeJoe


Ah, we get the honest answer at last. I will take whatever I want and you can't stop me. Nyaaaah.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
That is right - not everything has to be bought sold or traded; it can be "donated". Even you benefit from this - welcome to the human race.

Hopefully these researchers can find cures for AIDS and cancer and blindness, I wish them the best. Smile

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4864 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Ok JoeJoe, at least I know where you stand. If I submit my paper to an academic journal of my choosing. The paoer passes oeer review and meets editorial standards. And the publisher then publishes my paper, that's bad. But after publication, if a researcher I've never met obtains a copy of my paper and puts it on SciHub without my consent, then that's good.

Is this what you believe?

I've had very limited experience with this, but here's my take.

I've had a (very) few articles in my field (theater history) that were peer-reviewed and published in respected journals. This is decades ago. But I can find those articles now on the Internet republished by third parties. I never gave permission to those third parties.

Nor would I expect that permission would have to be given.

I don't and wouldn't feel the same way, say, had I written and published a novel.

The confluence of the following is important I think:

1) We're talking about non-rivalrous goods
2) We're talking about academic research
3) We're talking about access to other researchers

If academic research isn't freely available to peers for review and building upon, then the concept of academia in a free society is a joke.

Jon's solution, just giving access to the raw data is only a partial solution. Science is not just about replication but the interpretation of results. Without an actual article to review, important discussions would be curtailed.

There is much to be said pro and con about the arguments for intellectual property rights in various venues. But this is not that discussion. We are talking about academic research.
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Ok JoeJoe, at least I know where you stand. If I submit my paper to an academic journal of my choosing. The paoer passes oeer review and meets editorial standards. And the publisher then publishes my paper, that's bad. But after publication, if a researcher I've never met obtains a copy of my paper and puts it on SciHub without my consent, then that's good.

Is this what you believe?


I believe that if someone you've never met downloads your research from SciHub and uses your research to discover the cure for AIDS ..... then that is good.

I believe that If your research had not been downloaded, and AIDS does not get cured when it could be cured ..... then that is bad.

What does your consent have to do with the use of the research?? By having it published, you are consenting to let other researchers use it - that is exactly what is happening here, research is being used for what it was intended to be used for.

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Surely there is a distinction between changing a system to function differently and stealing from those who currently have a legal right to control their property.

I'm not a fan of the current system of academic publishing. I'd love to see changes.

But none of that justifies theft today.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Surely there is a distinction between changing a system to function differently and stealing from those who currently have a legal right to control their property.


The scientific "system" you are referring to has historically always worked this way - it is only within the last so many years that an attempt to change it began.

You seem to be confused; Elsevier is the one trying to change an existing system - not me. As I already stated, research on the polio vaccine was given away for free - that is how it was confirmed to actually work.

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
15959 Posts

Profile of tommy
It is not property legally speaking but a thing in action. If it is in the public domain then who owns it?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
The research itself is not "property"; only the paper it is printed on is. They don't get an exclusive copyright just because they printed the research - they only get the paper they printed it on.

It would be like trying to copyright letters of the alphabet and telling people they have to pay you a fee to use their letters - not happening.

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, JoeJoe wrote:
The research itself is not "property"; only the paper it is printed on is. They don't get an exclusive copyright just because they printed the research - they only get the paper they printed it on.

It would be like trying to copyright letters of the alphabet and telling people they have to pay you a fee to use their letters - not happening.

-JoeJoe


Are you inventing international copyright law now? You seem to be confusing the law as it is with the law as you'd like it to be.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
I am pointing out that scientific researchers do not get to use copyrights laws to pick and choose who gets to peer-review and verify their data.

Would you honestly inject a drug into your body that the researcher refused to let your doctor review and verify that it actually worked first??

You are honestly okay with letting a researcher inject a drug into the entire human population, the same population they refuse to share their data on that drug with??

All so a publishing company that had absolutely nothing to do with the research can profit off it?? [[rolling eyes]]

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
15959 Posts

Profile of tommy
It seems to me, it is author who owns a peer-reviewed published paper in one sense. However, because it is published for everybody to challenge etcetera, then nobody is taking possession of it or stealing it but simply reading it or distrusting it in accordance with the authors wish. Anybody holding it from others is the real crook because he is circumventing the will of the author.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20295 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
He obviously has no clue how the world actually is and pines away for a world he wants.

JoeJoe you do not get to make up stuff out of whole cloth and have everyone believe it is true.

Try understanding first, then change. Without understanding what you want to change from, to it is meaningless.

You keep yapping about a Polio vaccine. Amazing how that is the only example you can think of.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:
You keep yapping about a Polio vaccine. Amazing how that is the only example you can think of.


All medical research must be peer-reviewed; again, it is not my responsibility to do your research - if you don't understand the process or it's history, it is not my responsibility to explain it to you.

As Tommy pointed out, if you want to contribute scientific research to the community then the community has the right to challenge your research. Anyone holding it back from others is the real crook, go back to where I stated "who is stealing from whom?".

-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 0.17 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