from the should-privately-funded-research-be-free,-too? dept.
A young academic with coding savvy has become frustrated with the incarceration of information. Some of the world's best research continues to be trapped behind subscriptions and paywalls. This academic turns activist, and this activist then plots and executes the plan. It's time to free information from its chains—to give it to the masses free of charge. Along the way, this research Robin Hood is accused of being an illicit, criminal hacker - tale of the late Aaron Swartz
In 2016, the tale has new life. The Washington Post decries it as academic research's Napster moment, and it all stems from a 27-year-old bio-engineer turned Web programmer from Kazakhstan (who's living in Russia).
Just as Swartz did, this hacker is freeing tens of millions of research articles from paywalls, metaphorically hoisting a middle finger to the academic publishing industry, which, by the way, has again reacted with labels like "hacker" and "criminal."
Meet Alexandra Elbakyan, the developer of Sci-Hub, a Pirate Bay-like site for the science nerd. It's a portal that offers free and searchable access "to most publishers, especially well-known ones." Search for it, download, and you're done. It's that easy.
How do you think this will turn out?
[Ed. addition] The Washington Post article elaborates:
Sci-Hub connects to a database of stolen papers. If a user requests a paper in that database, Sci-Hub serves it up. If the paper is not there, Sci-Hub uses library passwords it has collected to find a paper, provides it to the searcher, then dumps the paper in the database. The site can be clunky to use, often sending users to Web pages in foreign languages.
Elbakyan and her supporters have said the passwords were donated by those sympathetic to her cause. But she also acknowledges that some passwords were obtained using the kind of phishing methods that hackers use to dupe people out of financial information.
"It may be well possible that phished passwords ended up being used at Sci-Hub," she said. "I did not send any phishing emails to anyone myself. The exact source of the passwords was never personally important to me."
Related Stories
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
Two years ago, academic publisher Elsevier filed a complaint against Sci-Hub, Libgen and several related "pirate" sites.
The publisher accused the websites of making academic papers widely available to the public, without permission.
While Sci-Hub and Libgen are nothing like the average pirate site, they are just as illegal according to Elsevier's legal team, which swiftly obtained a preliminary injunction from a New York District Court.
The injunction ordered Sci-Hub's founder Alexandra Elbakyan, who is the only named defendant, to quit offering access to any Elsevier content. This didn't happen, however.
Sci-Hub and the other websites lost control over several domain names, but were quick to bounce back. They remain operational today and have no intention of shutting down, despite pressure from the Court.
This prompted Elsevier to request a default judgment and a permanent injunction against the Sci-Hub and Libgen defendants. In a motion filed this week, Elsevier's legal team describes the sites as pirate havens.
Source: https://torrentfreak.com/elsevier-wants-15-million-piracy-damages-from-sci-hub-and-libgen-170518/
Previously:
The Research Pirates of the Dark Web
New York Times Opinion Piece on Open Access Publishing
A Spiritual Successor to Aaron Swartz is Angering Publishers All Over Again
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @05:59AM
This is great. Another suicide! In fact, let's have all the young talented coders kill themselves. That way we can justify even more H-1Bs. More! More!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by anubi on Monday April 04 2016, @06:23AM
You are talking about a guy who willingly gives up an awful lot so the rest of us can have access to the stuff the elite would rather us not see.
He deserves at the very least a hat-tip and sincere "thank-you" for what he is doing.
The taxpayer has funded most of this university research anyway.
I, for one, am really getting tired of this "socialize the expenses, privatize the profits" outlook of the elites.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 04 2016, @06:34AM
What the elite would rather us not see
Help me out here. Wasn't it just paywalled papers he was freeing? Or was there some other forever secret documents involved?
Seriously, I didn't follow it that closely.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Monday April 04 2016, @07:12AM
Paywalled papers to me is good enuf'. I probably helped pay for a lot of it, being a taxpayer, and the government handing out grants.
If someone else figured out a way to get paid for something someone else funded, and that seemed OK, then if workarounds are put in place to bypass the paywall, seems OK to me as well.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 04 2016, @07:47AM
We are talking about Swartz here right?
See it matters what these so called "elite" were trying to keep private.
Because of the extent of prosecutorial over reach, it becomes all the more excessive when if $35 would have given anyone access to that paper, or buying the journal when it comes out.
You glibly say "Paywalled papers to me is good enuf."
Personally I don't think the loss of a life is worth it for a paper that could be had cheaply, or maybe for free by waiting just a few months. A life for a paywalled paper is not a fair trade.
Would it be more of a fair trade if these "elites" you mention were actually trying to keep publicly funded research totally secret, and withholding results to take the inventions private? Maybe, but if that was the plan, why would there be a paywalled article at all?
That said Swartz took his own life, out of fear and despair, which was a silly thing to do, because the judgement would have been overturned eventually. These things tend to always go that way, when initial judgement are so excessive.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Monday April 04 2016, @08:04AM
Swartz made the strongest statement anyone can make.
Personally, it miffs me off a lot to see people privatizing information like these companies are doing.
You have probably researched things too, and know the thousands of things you scan through trying to find that one gem of info relevant to your quest. You have no idea if the gem is even in the other research until you have looked. At $35 just for a look, you can go broke fast, leaving research only for those who can afford financially to do anything.
I feel this capitalistic system I live in is going way overboard trying to milk every last cent of profit they can get.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 04 2016, @08:26AM
At $35 just for a look, you can go broke fast, leaving research only for those who can afford financially to do anything.
Well that's true for those of us not in the specific field of research. We generally don't pony up for every article. We might subscribe to a journal if we were really interested, but mostly if we can't find it on line or in a local library, we just wait till it becomes free, or read third party reviews of it.
But researchers and students at Universities usually get these reprints for free, paid for by their institution. If it gets published at all, and school worth its salt has it either physically or digitally.
Personally I think any research funded with a dollar of federal or state tax money should be free, or available or the price of reproduction. Some military secrets exempted perhaps.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by shrewdsheep on Monday April 04 2016, @08:52AM
Personally I think any research funded with a dollar of federal or state tax money should be free, or available or the price of reproduction. Some military secrets exempted perhaps.
Most would agree on that. The system is moving slowly but definitely in that direction. Data, code, and publications are supposed to be made freely available after the conclusion of any publicly funded project in my field (bio-medical). The reputation system in place still serves as a backing for the old pay-to-view journals. However, in my field there are several open access journals among the ones with the highest reputation. Many journals have turned hybrid, offering an open access option besides the free-to-publish standard. One problem that remains for myself is that open access publishing is still expensive. It cost upwards of $1500 to publish an article. If publishing money is not explicitly covered by a grant that can be quite some money. I believe that once cost for open access publishing comes down to $300 - which IMO would be a reasonable price - there will not be any excuse for not going open access and we can finally put this issue to a rest. Until then, publishers should still be pushed hard as they are the single most important road block to going open access throughout.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 04 2016, @04:36PM
How are peer reviews handled with the Journals you are familiar with?
What about editing done by the Journals?
I've heard it claimed that these paywalled journals provide a service by organizing the peer reviews and some minor editing, and that is what they use to justify their prices. Do you find any truth to these claims?
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by shrewdsheep on Monday April 04 2016, @08:22PM
Almost all peer reviewed journals I have published in provide an editing service. In my experience this was needed on technical grounds. You submit raw format articles in word or latex (depending on the journal) which is then reformatted into the journal style. Often fancy table style and two-column formats require some massaging to get it right. More often than not some content got severely mangled up or omitted as copy editors do not understand the content of the article. This is why you really have to carefully look at the proofs (what get's printed) and often it requires several rounds which tells me it is expensive. All these are technicalities though which can be overcome by better workflows. The exception to the rule I encountered is the R journal which is run more or less by volunteers. Articles are in one column format with a sensible latex template. The peer review in this case is purely an email exchange with the editor (who forwards to reviewers) and the paper is exactly what you send in. Also with the R journal there will be somebody checking and commenting on author guidelines (e.g. code formatting rules) without doing anything.
All in all cost could be kept to a minimum although webhosting, archiving, and for bigger journal maybe some minimal staff requires some funding. One of the leading open access journal groups (Plos) has spend 33Mio on publishing last year on an estimated 30k articles making the cost per article $1000 (they charge you $1500).https://www.plos.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Finance-2014-20151.jpg [plos.org]. I believe they could make good use of some good coders.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 04 2016, @08:59AM
"Personally I think any research funded with a dollar of federal or state tax money should be free, or available or the price of reproduction. Some military secrets exempted perhaps. "
With that, I can agree.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @10:43AM
But researchers and students at Universities usually get these reprints for free, paid for by their institution. If it gets published at all, and school worth its salt has it either physically or digitally.
Not even that anymore...
Harvard University says it can't afford journal publishers' prices [theguardian.com]
A memo from Harvard Library to the university's 2,100 teaching and research staff called for action after warning it could no longer afford the price hikes imposed by many large journal publishers, which bill the library around $3.5m a year.
:/
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 04 2016, @08:57AM
Swartz didn't die for some papers. He died because an army of government goods worked on him 'round the clock for months. When Swartz started out, he had little idea just how much pressure would be brought to bear against him. As I recall, government was talking about a thousand years of prison time, or some such nonsense. In short, government was intent on raping the man for the rest of his life, and beyond. Serial rapists and serial murderers don't get the treatment that Swartz was being promised.
And, Swartz wasn't strong enough to stand up under that kind of pressure. Anubi suggests that he made a powerful statement with his suicide - obviously we see things somewhat differently. It takes a mountain of fortitude to go up against government, and Swartz only had a low rolling hill of fortitude.
The subject of this article lives in a different world - the US can't really touch her. Russia may or may not go along with her, but they are very unlikely to punish her severely for infringing on US and western "intellectual property". She may, or may not, have greater fortitude than Swartz did, but she doesn't NEED it.
TL;DR - if the elites can't touch you, no one dies.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Monday April 04 2016, @03:05PM
The subject of this article lives in a different world - the US can't really touch her. Russia may or may not go along with her, but they are very unlikely to punish her severely for infringing on US and western "intellectual property".
She's in probably the safest place in the world she could be. It's pretty much impossible to get Russia to extradite someone. Russia is not a safe place to be if you anger the ruling class there, but they really don't give a shit if you anger the ruling class somewhere else.
(Score: 2) by Max Hyre on Monday April 04 2016, @03:56PM
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 04 2016, @04:46PM
And, Swartz wasn't strong enough to stand up under that kind of pressure. Anubi suggests that he made a powerful statement with his suicide - obviously we see things somewhat differently. It takes a mountain of fortitude to go up against government, and Swartz only had a low rolling hill of fortitude.
Thanks.
I was avoiding saying that.
Pretty sure if I had said that the howls of protest would still be echoing.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Informative) by butthurt on Monday April 04 2016, @07:04AM
Aaron Swartz was male, but Alexandra Elbakyan is female.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Monday April 04 2016, @07:14AM
Mea Culpa!
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 04 2016, @07:17AM
Aaron Swartz was male, but Alexandra Elbakyan is female.
Nothing in the thread suggests any misunderstanding of that fact. Why did you bring that up?
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Monday April 04 2016, @07:24AM
I buggered that one, Fro...
Mea Culpa on me for that one...
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 04 2016, @07:48AM
Ok, I thought you were talking about Aaron at that point.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @11:10PM
Talking about Aaron in the present tense?
I know he is somewhat revered among the geek community, but isn't the messiah and didn't come back to life 3 days after his death.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @01:39PM
the correct response to somebody correcting your gendering of another is to double down on your original determination of the other person's gender and sexually identify as an apache attach copter, not apologize!
(Score: 2) by Geezer on Monday April 04 2016, @01:46PM
She. Alexandra is a she.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @05:52PM
yeah, and i'm an apache attack copter.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Monday April 04 2016, @06:31AM
I doubt the Russian government is going to hound her like the US government did, and the fact that she has help and supporters and something of an organization behind her will probably help.
As long as she stays away from Russian research she's probably good.
I've been directed to some Russian site when trying to find the text of a paywalled paper out of a tax funded American university. Every University and College in this country has a web site. They should host their own work product, and if the journals can't survive in that environment, too bad. Let the Universities and other research houses manage their own peer review system.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by legont on Monday April 04 2016, @07:25PM
You are applying your western logic to Russians, which is a rather common mistake. Each and every book ever published in Russia is pirated multiple times all over the place. The best and oldest source is here http://lib.rus.ec/ [lib.rus.ec]
They have it all. One either pays for access or participates in activities such as proofreading. However, a free dump of the whole site database is available on monthly basis using torrent.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 04 2016, @07:37PM
No, I fully understand that in Russia, information wants to be free.
In fact, I believe Mr Putin is being re-acquainted with this maxim as we speek.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday April 04 2016, @06:56AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Monday April 04 2016, @08:18AM
The Washington Post decries it as academic research's Napster moment
I don't see the WP doing any decrying.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @10:38AM
Sci-Hub connects to a database of stolen papers.
Wow, I didn't know Sci-Hub is actually hacking the publisher's servers and deleting the papers after downloading!
... that's what they mean by "stolen", right?
(Score: 4, Funny) by Grishnakh on Monday April 04 2016, @02:55PM
No, not really. Since Sci-Hub is stealing these papers, they obviously must be physically traveling to the US, breaking into the publishers' offices, then not only deleting the papers from the webserver, but also tracking down every single backup copy and deleting those too, and then going back to the original author, breaking into his place, and tracking down every single copy of his paper (either digital or printed-out) and deleting it too. Finally, they must have figured out all the people who have downloaded that same paper, then traveled around the world breaking into their places, and deleting every single copy that was ever downloaded and/or printed out.
These Sci-Hub people must have some pretty significant resources to pull all this off....
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @03:17PM
If hackers broke in and took credit card or health care records from thousands or millions of subscribers, for the obvious purpose of reselling on the black market would you take offense if that act was characterized as stealing? Or would you silently think, I might've used a different word, but whatever.
(Score: 2) by Max Hyre on Monday April 04 2016, @03:42PM
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 05 2016, @08:12AM
I would call the crime, illegally obtaining and trafficking in credentials which can be used to facilitate theft. I would call it fraud if they were attempting to sell fake credit card information that is misrepresented as real.
The act of obtaining those credentials is not theft. It is unauthorised access, retrieval and / or storage of information. Nothing else.
To call unauthorised access, retrieval and / or storage of information theft is, I think, a little more disingenuous than mere simplification by metaphor for those who do no properly understand. It used as an emotional anchor to call for more severe punishments and curtailments than, in many cases, are justified by the offense.
Quite frankly I am suprised to find somebody so stupid as to say "theft" when they mean "unauthorised access to information" commenting on soylentnews. Oh well, I suppose anybody can post. (yes I am referring to second AC here, not GGGGP AC or OP).
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @04:18PM
Original AC here.
If hackers broke in and took credit card or health care records from thousands or millions of subscribers, for the obvious purpose of reselling on the black market would you take offense if that act was characterized as stealing?
That's a good point, never thought about it. I should be taking offense at that, too. The word "steal" has a particular meaning; if the original owner isn't deprived of a possession, then it wasn't stolen. Credit card fraud may result in money being stolen. What Sci-Hub does is "infringement", or maybe "illegal copying".
When talking about infringement, "steal" is used exclusively to evoke an emotional response, and it has already done an enormous damage to our culture. See DMCA, SOPA.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @03:46PM
we would start saying "destructively duplicated" even when they aren't destroyed
(Score: 2, Informative) by looorg on Monday April 04 2016, @10:47AM
Who is getting paid to spam the Sci-Hub adverts as "news"? It's hardly breaking news anymore. It's the same thing being regurgitated over and over again. Last time I checked Sci-Hub it was filled with books and comics, has that changed? I failed then to see how this was liberation of academic papers and if it is the case it is still going on I guess nothing really has changed.
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=15/06/09/207218 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=16/03/14/2212215 [soylentnews.org]
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=16/02/15/1716236 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @11:09AM
I've used it to access two primary research papers and one review. There are plenty of other sites that have entertainment media, but this is the only site I've seen that has a search option for PubMed IDs.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Monday April 04 2016, @01:45PM
If you see this more frequently, is because the news outlets would pulish it more frequently.
To my mind, it resembles propaganda rather than adverts; at least a mounting pressure going towards eliminating the site.
Pay attention to the terms used: thief, stolen papers, piracy, passwords obtained by phishing, etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @12:21PM
applies especially to scientific information.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 04 2016, @01:24PM
No, really. Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. [reddit.com]
P.S. Aaron was co-founder of that site and his candle remains unextinguished.