Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Could Greed end research gate?

Could Greed end research gate?

NEMO-Chemistry - 12-10-2017 at 12:00

this explains it

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/cen-09540-notw13?ref=Pu...

myristicinaldehyde - 12-10-2017 at 12:29

Well, thank God for Russian servers! In my opinion, the Elsevier model is deeply unethical, and so is this copyright case... While the authors do have their intellectual rights, its not like the researchers ever see the money that their papers make.

NEMO-Chemistry - 12-10-2017 at 13:36

Quote: Originally posted by myristicinaldehyde

Well, thank God for Russian servers! In my opinion, the Elsevier model is deeply unethical, and so is this copyright case... While the authors do have their intellectual rights, its not like the researchers ever see the money that their papers make.

If you read the full text the russian servers are being hit as well. The well know one is also being served.

This time they are going after the companies and registers that give them the name. So sci*** name will soon be gone

NEMO-Chemistry - 12-10-2017 at 13:42

actually stuff it, here it is in full

Attachment: sci.pdf (112kB)
This file has been downloaded 571 times

What i didnt know until recently was the greed involved. I assumed researchers were paid to publish the paper. Turns out as most will know, the journal charges you a huge amount to submit the paper, and add more per chart etc. Then if you dont pay the extortion amount to subscribe you have to pay £35 min per paper to read it.

Whatever way you cut it thats publishers being greedy, i wouldnt have such an issue if they wernt charging both sides, if they paid the people submitting then fair enough, but to charge those to submit and then charge people to read....

The sharing of knowledge is vital, to profit and hinder the sharing is wrong. Just my opinion feel free to hold your own.

Research gate is a great resource, they are not commercial in the sense the publishers are trying to allude too.

[Edited on 12-10-2017 by NEMO-Chemistry]

S.C. Wack - 12-10-2017 at 14:15

Quote: Originally posted by NEMO-Chemistry

What i didnt know until recently was the greed involved.

Some background:
Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

NEMO-Chemistry - 12-10-2017 at 15:04

Quote: Originally posted by S.C. Wack

Quote: Originally posted by NEMO-Chemistry

What i didnt know until recently was the greed involved.

Some background:
Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

I have read it all. I honestly have no idea what to say, absolute stunned silence. I am at a complete loss as to how they can get away with it. the last part about the woman behind scihub, surely her point about the united declaration on the right to access science is being utterly breached?

But i suppose when your up against that kind of money (i had no idea of the actual sums!!), i cant see how you could stop a publisher with that kind of power.

I admit i am a bit of a utopian, and perfect world kinda person, but i found it sickening reading that..

Whats really upsetting though, for a split second it did cross my mind, if i ever get spare cash then shares in the company might be a good idea. So I guess I am a long way from perfect myself

[Edited on 12-10-2017 by NEMO-Chemistry]

RogueRose - 13-10-2017 at 04:39

There has to be a way to do a site that is similar to the way music is now distributed. Everytime the paper is accessed (paid for) the site collects their % and the author gets their %. The site could get a set % and the writer gets the rest - and I think they should be able to choose what they charge for each of their publications. Possibly have a redacted version that would be of more interest for things like school reports and such that is available either for free or for something like $.99.

If something like this were actually available at a reasonable price with no recurring subscription, I would think that these would be used very often for school student research (research paper sources) where the school doesn't pay the very high access premium for the entire school.

Can authors submit their papers to multiple distributors like researchgate and others, or do they have to sign a contract with a company like researchgate to be the sole distributor?

[Edited on 13-10-2017 by RogueRose]

NEMO-Chemistry - 13-10-2017 at 06:30

Quote: Originally posted by RogueRose

There has to be a way to do a site that is similar to the way music is now distributed. Everytime the paper is accessed (paid for) the site collects their % and the author gets their %. The site could get a set % and the writer gets the rest - and I think they should be able to choose what they charge for each of their publications. Possibly have a redacted version that would be of more interest for things like school reports and such that is available either for free or for something like $.99.

If something like this were actually available at a reasonable price with no recurring subscription, I would think that these would be used very often for school student research (research paper sources) where the school doesn't pay the very high access premium for the entire school.

Can authors submit their papers to multiple distributors like researchgate and others, or do they have to sign a contract with a company like researchgate to be the sole distributor?

[Edited on 13-10-2017 by RogueRose]

The publishers already do this, the problem is a single paper will cost you roughly £35

To them that is a reasonable price, read the other link and look at the profits they make, there is no way a company is going to lower its prices to make an amateur happy.

Open access is getting more popular, however the journals of prestige are not amongst them, its a no win situation for those who need to publish, the best way is to help support sites like Sci***

plastics - 13-10-2017 at 12:22

Quote: Originally posted by NEMO-Chemistry

this explains it

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/cen-09540-notw13?ref=Pu...

The ultimate irony is that they ask you to pay $10 to access this article in full - nothing a visit to Scihub can't sort - cretins

JJay - 13-10-2017 at 13:05

Many college libraries have subscriptions... but many do not.

NEMO-Chemistry - 13-10-2017 at 13:44

Quote: Originally posted by plastics

Quote: Originally posted by NEMO-Chemistry

this explains it

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/cen-09540-notw13?ref=Pu...

The ultimate irony is that they ask you to pay $10 to access this article in full - nothing a visit to Scihub can't sort - cretins

Well i saved you the $10 and posted the complete thing, i know you didnt bother reading. Because had you read it then you would know, us cretins are unlikely to have scihub much longer...

I also mentioned this above, maybe your screen greyed out that bit, but as i mentioned, they are not going directly after scihub, instead they are stopping people like scihub from registering domain names in the first place.

Probably some way around it, but i doubt a cretin like me could work it out.

EDIT

Sorry Plastic, i read your post again. I thought you were saying we were cretins for not using scihub!! I guess its readable both ways. My bad I understand what your saying now....sorry for the abrupt reply

[Edited on 13-10-2017 by NEMO-Chemistry]

RogueRose - 14-10-2017 at 15:55

Quote: Originally posted by NEMO-Chemistry

Quote: Originally posted by RogueRose

Well I found a listing they had that needed access for it ($35) and it gave a short preview of it. The article ended up being an entire paragraph long and was only a scentence longer than the preview. It was from a magazine where an entire page listed like 12 projects, each with a picture and a paragraph sumarizing it but the preview only showed the first 3 sentences where there was another that was hidden. Now $35 for that? They could charge that for each of the "projects" on that page - so 12 x $35 =$420 for a scan of a magazine from 1986. Totally ridiculous.

plastics - 14-10-2017 at 22:23

Quote: Originally posted by NEMO-Chemistry

Quote: Originally posted by plastics

Quote: Originally posted by NEMO-Chemistry

this explains it

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/cen-09540-notw13?ref=Pu...

The ultimate irony is that they ask you to pay $10 to access this article in full - nothing a visit to Scihub can't sort - cretins

My cretinaceous comment is most certainly directed at the egregious publishers not hard pressed sciencemadness friends

Melgar - 16-10-2017 at 22:45

To be fair, the journals pay referees to critique your paper, and good referees will make the good papers better and the bad papers never see daylight. At least that's my understanding.

symboom - 16-10-2017 at 23:52

Some interesting videos about pay walls
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=69yF7ksLWC0
Why research papers should be free to look at
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=42QuXLucH3Q

plastics - 17-10-2017 at 00:20

Quote: Originally posted by Melgar

To be fair, the journals pay referees to critique your paper, and good referees will make the good papers better and the bad papers never see daylight. At least that's my understanding.

BS! - read the Guardian article above - Thanks to Bob Maxwell most peer reviewers do it FOC. I have been a reviewer in the past - there is no 'fee' for doing it; you donate your time in exchange for the 'prestige' of being involved rather than any monetary reward. There is also a certain amount of politics involved - what better opportunity to give your own team time/inspiration to get their results in order by 'trashing' a rival's good work; not that I ever got involved in such disreputable behaviour!

Nicodem - 17-10-2017 at 08:12

Just to clarify a few issues:

- Researchgate is a social network for researchers. It allows for easy communication between researchers, automatic notifications (citations, new publications...), and other more or less useful features. Most articles on Researchgate were uploaded by authors themselves so that their publications could be available to all free of charge (though you need to register first).

- Authors are generally not paid for publishing articles. If you are an academic researcher, then you are forced into publishing to keep up with habilitations and other requirements of the employers or sponsoring institutions. To publish in certain open access journals, you need to pay a fee (for example, about 1000 EUR), but you are not forced to publish in open access journals, so essentially you can publish without any expense from your side. Some open access journals publish without a fee from the authors. It pretty much depends, if you prefer to publish in a high impact factor journal, or you rather prefer to provide open access to readers. Researchers in industry, with few exceptions, are commonly not motivated for publishing their work (or are prevented from doing so by the employer). Some of their work is generally published only in patent literature which is required to be open access by law.

- The listed price for single time access to an article is nearly obsolete. Almost no one pays that. Most access to articles is IP recognition based, because libraries, universities, research institutions and private companies have subscription agreements.

- Reviewers are not paid. It is a moral duty of a scientist to peer review articles for publishing. Essentially, anyone who ever published any article, can be contacted by editors to act as a peer reviewer. Generally, two or three peer reviewers are involved in reviewing a single article. Sometimes this can take hours of work, so it is quite a lot of free work that the publishers can exploit for their commercial activity.

- Preventing Sci-Hub from registering an URL will not stop it/her. It can still use just an IP address and the content can be stored on a server located out of USA jurisdiction, or the jurisdiction of satellite countries. It is more backward to use an IP address, but nevertheless. It would take the use of a national IP firewall ban in each county in order to seriously threaten them (and even then, anyone can use proxies).

[Edited on 17/10/2017 by Nicodem]

NEMO-Chemistry - 18-10-2017 at 18:53

So why have ACS and Elsiver BOTH just sued research gate for copy write if its down to the authors? That dosnt make alot of sense unless the publisher is not allowing release after 6 or 12 months??

One of the articles above explains that one science company pays over £1billion a year in subscriptions. I cant see it any other way but greed.

Nicodem - 20-10-2017 at 23:01

Authorship does not give authors the right to distribute their work, because once the authors publish in a scientific journal they transfer copyrights to the publisher. For this reason it is completely irrelevant that most articles at Researchgate were uploaded by authors. It is still illegal. You can look at this as a legality vs. legitimacy issue, but the two are quite distinct concepts. While the researchers are legitimately doing this, their act can still be presumably illegal. In fact, if the publishers would be evil enough and had unlimited resources, they could just as easily sue individual authors caught in the act of distributing copies of their own articles. Obviously, it is immensely easier to go after Researchgate as a single big opponent.

Having legitimacy on your side does not prevent you from loosing your case in a court of law. In fact, legitimacy only means that you have sufficient arguments for believing you are doing the ethically correct thing - it does not mean that you are doing a legally allowed thing. Legitimacy is just a psychological or sociological concept - so it can sometimes help getting a reduced punishment, but not to avoid a guilt sentence.

Harristotle - 21-10-2017 at 00:07

True, but if you use it as a preprint server, you may be able to get around this.

The journals argue that they add value by peer-reviewing the manuscript.

Logically, any version of the manuscript that exists prior to the review being done has not had journal input or value added.

Secondarily, the criteria for contributing to authorship differs between an unpublished paper and one that has been peer reviewed. If the people normally with acknowledgement status are included on the preprints authors, then quite defensibly the paper is different - no copyright involved.

I am sure that smarter and more imaginitive people than I can see other ways around it too !

Cheers,
H.

NEMO-Chemistry - 21-10-2017 at 04:40

I dont know which publisher now, i expect they are not so different, but if you goto the submit pages you are given options, some options cost more than others, there was an option to go open access this cost alot, then an option not to share for 12 months this was cheaper and so on. So publishers do offer the authors (some publishers anyway) the o[pportu8nity to share papers after a set period.

Peer reviewed or not, once the costs have been covered and a large profit made, then to me a paper should be free. How does copyright rules apply to papers? Are they like books where after X time they are free of copyright?

NEMO-Chemistry - 21-10-2017 at 04:43

I forgot to mention, for those who dislike breaking the law. there is a directory of open access journals and papers, its pretty huge!

https://doaj.org/

And another
https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access-journals-list.php

[Edited on 21-10-2017 by NEMO-Chemistry]

macckone - 21-10-2017 at 16:47

One important thing to note is that sci-hub does not use US servers or domain registrars so a us court decision is unlikely to impact them. In fact the reason they use their current registrar and servers is because of prior us court decisions.

As for researchgate, if the material was published on researchgate before it was published in the journals, the
journals do not have a case. Researchgate is not legally obligated to respond until it receives a takedown notice. Depending on its claim of status, it may be able to simply send each uploader a link that says this is/is not my original work. There are a number of ways to do this under the DMCA. A magistrate claim of injunction is not necessarily an adversarial procedure. Meaning researchgate may not have had the option to respond. Usually magistrate decisions are subject to appeal to a district judge and if there is an appeal, then there will be formal hearings.

The jersey rebel - 15-3-2018 at 20:26

Just absurd that research gate is getting screwed over. I get people have to cover costs but Jesus Christ. I use scihub tbh. I go through their TOR address as it’s more secure. Also, I mirrored scihub as of last month. That way, when it goes down, I still have a copy of the entire site. I used WinHTtrack for this which compresses it to 20GB. It’s even bigger than this site in terms of mirrored size as this site was a 3GB file. library, documents, Wiki, whisper, and PDFs included. The file size is reduced to 0.005% if it’s original size because of how it works. A 5GB file link becomes a 1.6MB!

symboom - 16-3-2018 at 16:22

Paying for information is a pain also the researchers that have goverment grants
Here is a video explaining it
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=69yF7ksLWC0
And why the papers should be free
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L7oklmbtxoY
Who pays for science

[Edited on 17-3-2018 by symboom]

symboom - 14-8-2018 at 22:30

Alright its becomung more popular

[Edited on 15-8-2018 by symboom]

streety - 15-8-2018 at 03:55

Quote: Originally posted by The jersey rebel

Just absurd that research gate is getting screwed over. I get people have to cover costs but Jesus Christ. I use scihub tbh. I go through their TOR address as it’s more secure. Also, I mirrored scihub as of last month. That way, when it goes down, I still have a copy of the entire site. I used WinHTtrack for this which compresses it to 20GB. It’s even bigger than this site in terms of mirrored size as this site was a 3GB file. library, documents, Wiki, whisper, and PDFs included. The file size is reduced to 0.005% if it’s original size because of how it works. A 5GB file link becomes a 1.6MB!

Are you sure you have the entire site? They have 70 million articles. If the entire mirror takes only 20GB that suggests each file takes on average just 286 bytes. I understand many of the files could be optimized and compressed but an average size of 286 bytes seems extreme.

Does WinHTtrack handle the CAPTCHAs?