Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 129 posts

Re: US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

#41

Post by tomjen3 »

avh02 wrote: post #6
wccrawford wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The blocking of the site by ISPs and search engines is the bad part, IMO. Other than that, it seems pretty standard. And it's kind of dumb, because they could just get a new domain name, like many of the other torrent sites do. It's effectively worthless.

I grew up in a country where certain websites (you know, like adult sites) are blocked, I'm not comparing this to that exactly, but isn't it strange to be told that your ISP is hereby not allowed to provide you access to a website? Especially when nobody unanimously agrees that it's a bad thing? (I'm not here to argue the ethics/morality of it, but pointing out that it has proponents on both sides) I mean, I know blo…

Dane here. Our ISPs blocked a lot of sites and claimed they were all cp, but when the list (or partial they wouldn't comment) got leaked on wikileaks it turned out to be also a bunch of gay sites as well as a dutch company selling trucks for warehouses - not exactly dressed, but also not CP.

So I wouldn't trust the integrity of any system which we are being denied information about.

Re: US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

#43

Post by namelost »

rayiner wrote: post #30
Knufen wrote: post #5

As someone who works in academia (Europe) I understand that scientific papers need hosting and server space and such, but does it really help humanity that all advances will be behind very expensive pay walls? I would argue otherwise. The current trend is not sustainable nor favorable for anyone except parasitic publishers. Edit: I understand the website was breaking the law, but this seems like symptom treating

The law doesn't operate by going back to first principles ("will it really help humanity?") in every case. We've decided copyright is reasonable as a concept, and we evaluate each case by reference to the rules of copyright, without creating special exceptions all over the place. Nor are any special exceptions necessary. Absolutely nothing prevents scientists and academics from publishing in open-access journals. Sci…

The US is a corrupt country, the laws are written figuratively or sometimes literally by corporations with the intent on profiting from them.

Given that, it is unsurprising that the laws do not represent the interests of the common person.

Re: US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

#44

Post by PenguinCoder »

Analemma_ wrote: post #35
PenguinCoder wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the key takeaway from the article. As much as I agree that researches deserve fair compensation for their work; I also believe gate-keeping academic knowledge is also wrong. It's not surprising that the US legal system found against Sci-hub. Issuing the legally binding statement, that blocking a site by ISP and search engine level, is the real problem. It sets a very tenuous precedent.

> As much as I agree that researches deserve fair compensation for their work Researchers don't get paid by journals for their submissions. In fact, it's usually exactly the opposite: most of the big ones have submission fees. This is why I don't really have any sympathy for the publishers affected by Sci-Hub, when at the same I strenuously oppose software/game piracy. I just don't see what service they provide: they…

Thanks for the clarification. I agree with what you're saying; paywalls need to go away especially for valuable scientific research/findings.

Re: US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

#45

Post by KGIII »

travmatt wrote: post #37
rayiner wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The law doesn't operate by going back to first principles ("will it really help humanity?") in every case. We've decided copyright is reasonable as a concept, and we evaluate each case by reference to the rules of copyright, without creating special exceptions all over the place. Nor are any special exceptions necessary. Absolutely nothing prevents scientists and academics from publishing in open-access journals. Sci…

Because most of the research is funded by tax dollars?

Is 'most' true? It may also matter whose tax dollars they were. Google isn't being helpful.

To be absolutely clear, I'm very much on the side of open publishing. I just want to be able to form a more accurate reasoning so that I can well explain it to others.

Re: US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

#46

Post by aw3c2 »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #10
Overtonwindow wrote: post #4

Thankfully there's TOR and other methods to get around this. I disagree completely with the courts. Long live Sci-Hub

The worrying thing is that now there's a single point of failure: Elbakyan. She has the power to cut off anyone she wants to, and she did it in the past to some Russian university that dared criticize her.

Do your part and start mirroring parts of it! http://libgen.io/scimag/repository_torrent/

Re: US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

#47

Post by anigbrowl »

mattmanser wrote: post #40
rayiner wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The law doesn't operate by going back to first principles ("will it really help humanity?") in every case. We've decided copyright is reasonable as a concept, and we evaluate each case by reference to the rules of copyright, without creating special exceptions all over the place. Nor are any special exceptions necessary. Absolutely nothing prevents scientists and academics from publishing in open-access journals. Sci…

This presents some pretty extreme view points as if they're perfectly reasonable. I doubt you could find any member of the public who would say "Yes" if asked "Should research you paid for cost you money to read?". No reasonable person would agree with the rules as they are if they were introduced today, we got here because it's not an election issue and special interests and lobbyists have distorted rules written ce…

It's descriptive, not prescriptive. Rayiner isn't endorsing the law itself, he's just telling you how it operates. People often seem to have trouble distinguishing between positive statements ('this is how things work') and normative statements ('this is how things ought to work.')

I agree with you that the laws are corrupt and should be changed, but that's going to involve refactoring the entire legal system on different operating principles, which is a radical change. IT's important to understand that this isn't one bad decision by a court or something that can fixed with a patch. Are you up for such a gargantuan task?

Re: US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

#48

Post by KGIII »

Chaebixi wrote: post #36
vanattab wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are paid ether by their respective universities/institutions/companies and/or they pay themselves from the grant money they were awarded for a specific project.

But the key point is that they're not paid by the publisher for the publication, they're paid to produce the publication by others. The publisher is just gets it for (basically) free and then profits off the fees.

In fact, you may very well also be paying to get your research published. They get you coming and going.

Re: US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

#49

Post by anigbrowl »

cobookman wrote: post #16
Knufen wrote: post #5

As someone who works in academia (Europe) I understand that scientific papers need hosting and server space and such, but does it really help humanity that all advances will be behind very expensive pay walls? I would argue otherwise. The current trend is not sustainable nor favorable for anyone except parasitic publishers. Edit: I understand the website was breaking the law, but this seems like symptom treating

Don't forget the peer review and vetting process. As for the price I don't think it's really that expensive. I've never heard of a research University unable to afford it. And if not for the fees we'd have no journals. Maybe when we are post scarcity then it'd be free. But until then people's time is not unlimited and is worth something.

I happen to live near a research university and while I'm not a student nobody seems to object to me wandering in and using the libraries there from time to time. But for most people the cost of accessing a journal article for casual interest is prohibitive, and not everyone has the funds or time to attend a university. The point of the web is to make knowledge available to everyone.

Be realistic, it costs more to read a single article on Nature or Science than it does to buy a book on the topic. That's bullshit.

Re: US Court Grants ISPs and Search Engine Blockade of Sci-Hub

#50

Post by Bromskloss »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #10
Overtonwindow wrote: post #4

Thankfully there's TOR and other methods to get around this. I disagree completely with the courts. Long live Sci-Hub

The worrying thing is that now there's a single point of failure: Elbakyan. She has the power to cut off anyone she wants to, and she did it in the past to some Russian university that dared criticize her.

That's pretty funny, at least if their criticism was that Sci-Hub shouldn't exist.
Post reply on HN