» In which a Science editorial demonstrates the ineffectiveness of OA activism 2016-04-30


" ... The editorial is essentially trying to make the somewhat tenuous but not implausible case that using sci-hub may lead to subscription cancellations which, in turn, may lead to scholarly societies (like those of Dr. McNutts employer, AAAS) to miss revenue they need in order to pay for important services (such as paying Dr. McNutt’s salary/compensation). While I would tend to hope (against better judgment) that sci-hub could indeed lead to subscription cancellations via the mechanisms detailed in the editorial, I essentially disagree with everything else. This is precisely why it serves as a great example of what is wrong with the approach behind the editorial, which, coincidentally, is an approach the open access movement has been deploying to a large extent over the last two decades as well. The observation that sci-hub is being heavily used also in universities which have decent access to the literature demonstrates two points which are not mutually exclusive: Even at rich institutions, access is still an issue. Sci-hub is more efficient than what the institutional infrastructure offers. Both insights entail that sci-hub fills a need researchers have ..."


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) »

Tags: oa.comment oa.sci-hub oa.piracy oa.debates oa.societies oa.publishers oa.business_models oa.sustainability oa.economics_of oa.guerrilla

Date tagged:

04/30/2016, 09:17

Date published:

04/30/2016, 05:17