The curious case of Sci-Hub.

newer
Informatics Innovation Award --...

saleeq omar

24 Dec 2020 24 Dec '20

4:12 a.m.

The pathetic note by Vineet Kumar on the Sci-Hub is appalling. In countries where the scholarship is poorly funded or there are budgetary constraints every other day- to keep pace with the phenomenally expensive demands of the publishers, Sci-Hub free access, no matter the way it disseminates information, is perfectly reasonable. It is a step closer to the democratization of information; free access to publicly funded research. The advocates of open access who otherwise should have defended it are siding with the ones whose business is to trap knowledge behind paywalls. it deeply worries me about the future of research in countries like ours. The scholarship is being produced mainly by the universities and is given to third parties for free, and then pay that party to access our own research. There are these terrible problems that require an investigation, different perspectives to deal with them, but unfortunately, we have people who cluelessly are endorsing the monopoly. In our decadent library systems, that failed to give ubiquitous access to their ostensible subscribed resources during the pandemic, it was Sci-Hub, that provided free and uninterrupted access to everyone in their comfort zones. The only issue if there is any, is the issue of copyright, it is time for the policymakers to find alternative ways if they are unhappy with the Sci-Hub, rather than banning it for good. Saleeq Omar -PhD. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

Show replies by date

Vinit Kumar

24 Dec 24 Dec

5:12 a.m.

The open access movement never demanded to have free access of research by means of breaching copyright laws, rather it acts as pressure group focusing adaptation of release of research papers under open licenses, however, some people term it as Guerilla Open access, which is not a right term. I have several other questions: What are the reasons that most of the university presses and academic learned societies either ceased publishing academic journals or transferred the management to academic publishers? Why still many authors(including developing countries) prefer to publish in paywalled journals despite knowing that they will have to pay to access there own content when they have options to publish in open access journals? Why the funding for higher education is decreasing every year in spite of an increasing number of enrolments? When public money can be spent on other futile reasons why not on access to global research output? Why successful national-level library consortium, such as UGC-INFONET was halted that was providing legal access to scientific literature? Why governments are not developing an equitable system that serves both commercial publishers and access to academics and make these pirates of no value? On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 2:42 PM saleeq omar wrote:

...

The pathetic note by Vineet Kumar on the Sci-Hub is appalling. In countries where the scholarship is poorly funded or there are budgetary constraints every other day- to keep pace with the phenomenally expensive demands of the publishers, Sci-Hub free access, no matter the way it disseminates information, is perfectly reasonable. It is a step closer to the democratization of information; free access to publicly funded research. The advocates of open access who otherwise should have defended it are siding with the ones whose business is to trap knowledge behind paywalls. it deeply worries me about the future of research in countries like ours. The scholarship is being produced mainly by the universities and is given to third parties for free, and then pay that party to access our own research. There are these terrible problems that require an investigation, different perspectives to deal with them, but unfortunately, we have people who cluelessly are endorsing the monopoly. In our decadent library systems, that failed to give ubiquitous access to their ostensible subscribed resources during the pandemic, it was Sci-Hub, that provided free and uninterrupted access to everyone in their comfort zones. The only issue if there is any, is the issue of copyright, it is time for the policymakers to find alternative ways if they are unhappy with the Sci-Hub, rather than banning it for good.

Saleeq Omar -PhD.

-- Regards Vinit Kumar, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Library and Information Science Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Rae Bareilly Road, Lucknow 226025 +919454120174 https://sites.google.com/view/vinitkumar

Murari Tapaswi

9:26 p.m.

I think,Dr.Vinit Kumar is drifting from the issues that he initially raised. Regards, Dr. Murari P. Tapaswi, Phone/WhatsApp: 9763341967 On Thu, 24 Dec, 2020, 10:35 pm Vinit Kumar, wrote:

...

The open access movement never demanded to have free access of research by means of breaching copyright laws, rather it acts as pressure group focusing adaptation of release of research papers under open licenses, however, some people term it as Guerilla Open access, which is not a right term.

I have several other questions: What are the reasons that most of the university presses and academic learned societies either ceased publishing academic journals or transferred the management to academic publishers?

Why still many authors(including developing countries) prefer to publish in paywalled journals despite knowing that they will have to pay to access there own content when they have options to publish in open access journals? Why the funding for higher education is decreasing every year in spite of an increasing number of enrolments? When public money can be spent on other futile reasons why not on access to global research output? Why successful national-level library consortium, such as UGC-INFONET was halted that was providing legal access to scientific literature? Why governments are not developing an equitable system that serves both commercial publishers and access to academics and make these pirates of no value?

On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 2:42 PM saleeq omar wrote:

...
The pathetic note by Vineet Kumar on the Sci-Hub is appalling. In countries where the scholarship is poorly funded or there are budgetary constraints every other day- to keep pace with the phenomenally expensive demands of the publishers, Sci-Hub free access, no matter the way it disseminates information, is perfectly reasonable. It is a step closer to the democratization of information; free access to publicly funded research. The advocates of open access who otherwise should have defended it are siding with the ones whose business is to trap knowledge behind paywalls. it deeply worries me about the future of research in countries like ours. The scholarship is being produced mainly by the universities and is given to third parties for free, and then pay that party to access our own research. There are these terrible problems that require an investigation, different perspectives to deal with them, but unfortunately, we have people who cluelessly are endorsing the monopoly. In our decadent library systems, that failed to give ubiquitous access to their ostensible subscribed resources during the pandemic, it was Sci-Hub, that provided free and uninterrupted access to everyone in their comfort zones. The only issue if there is any, is the issue of copyright, it is time for the policymakers to find alternative ways if they are unhappy with the Sci-Hub, rather than banning it for good.

Saleeq Omar -PhD.

-- Regards Vinit Kumar, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Library and Information Science Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Rae Bareilly Road, Lucknow 226025 +919454120174 https://sites.google.com/view/vinitkumar _______________________________________________ LIS-Forum mailing list LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum

Vinit Kumar

9:46 p.m.

If you try to find answers to the questions raised by me in the previous mail you will see it relates to the issue I raised in my first response. See the last line of my initial response. Regards -- Vinit Kumar, PhD Assistant Professor Department of Library and Information Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University (A central university) Lucknow 226025 This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow. On Fri, Dec 25, 2020, 7:57 AM Murari Tapaswi wrote:

...

I think,Dr.Vinit Kumar is drifting from the issues that he initially raised.

Regards,

Dr. Murari P. Tapaswi, Phone/WhatsApp: 9763341967

On Thu, 24 Dec, 2020, 10:35 pm Vinit Kumar, wrote:

...
The open access movement never demanded to have free access of research by means of breaching copyright laws, rather it acts as pressure group focusing adaptation of release of research papers under open licenses, however, some people term it as Guerilla Open access, which is not a right term.

I have several other questions: What are the reasons that most of the university presses and academic learned societies either ceased publishing academic journals or transferred the management to academic publishers?

Why still many authors(including developing countries) prefer to publish in paywalled journals despite knowing that they will have to pay to access there own content when they have options to publish in open access journals? Why the funding for higher education is decreasing every year in spite of an increasing number of enrolments? When public money can be spent on other futile reasons why not on access to global research output? Why successful national-level library consortium, such as UGC-INFONET was halted that was providing legal access to scientific literature? Why governments are not developing an equitable system that serves both commercial publishers and access to academics and make these pirates of no value?

On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 2:42 PM saleeq omar wrote:

...
The pathetic note by Vineet Kumar on the Sci-Hub is appalling. In countries where the scholarship is poorly funded or there are budgetary constraints every other day- to keep pace with the phenomenally expensive demands of the publishers, Sci-Hub free access, no matter the way it disseminates information, is perfectly reasonable. It is a step closer to the democratization of information; free access to publicly funded research. The advocates of open access who otherwise should have defended it are siding with the ones whose business is to trap knowledge behind paywalls. it deeply worries me about the future of research in countries like ours. The scholarship is being produced mainly by the universities and is given to third parties for free, and then pay that party to access our own research. There are these terrible problems that require an investigation, different perspectives to deal with them, but unfortunately, we have people who cluelessly are endorsing the monopoly. In our decadent library systems, that failed to give ubiquitous access to their ostensible subscribed resources during the pandemic, it was Sci-Hub, that provided free and uninterrupted access to everyone in their comfort zones. The only issue if there is any, is the issue of copyright, it is time for the policymakers to find alternative ways if they are unhappy with the Sci-Hub, rather than banning it for good.

Saleeq Omar -PhD.

-- Regards Vinit Kumar, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Library and Information Science Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Rae Bareilly Road, Lucknow 226025 +919454120174 https://sites.google.com/view/vinitkumar _______________________________________________ LIS-Forum mailing list LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum

1587

Age (days ago)

1588

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

3 comments

3 participants

participants (3)

Murari Tapaswi
saleeq omar
Vinit Kumar