This cannot come soon enough: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_S
Are there similar initiatives in US?
Swedish ISP Blocks Elsevier for Forcing It to Block Sci-Hub (2018)
11–14 of 14 posts
Re: Swedish ISP Blocks Elsevier for Forcing It to Block Sci-Hub (2018)
#12I'd expect Elsevier to sue them for commandeering their domain name like this. Blocking elsevier.com is one thing (possibly actionable in itself), but taking them to a different site with its own political agenda is a much bigger problem. What if they were hijacking a political party's site, or a government site, or any number of other scenarios? Even if they're up-front about the hijacking, they're still effectively…
> they're still effectively taking control of something that doesn't belong to them
You mean like Elsevier is taking control of something (sci-hub.se) that doesn't belong to them?
Re: Swedish ISP Blocks Elsevier for Forcing It to Block Sci-Hub (2018)
#13I'd expect Elsevier to sue them for commandeering their domain name like this. Blocking elsevier.com is one thing (possibly actionable in itself), but taking them to a different site with its own political agenda is a much bigger problem. What if they were hijacking a political party's site, or a government site, or any number of other scenarios? Even if they're up-front about the hijacking, they're still effectively…
> they're still effectively taking control of something that doesn't belong to them You mean like Elsevier is taking control of something (sci-hub.se) that doesn't belong to them?
They are not. They are compelling an ISP to block a site (not redirect it) by using the courts.
Re: Swedish ISP Blocks Elsevier for Forcing It to Block Sci-Hub (2018)
#14It's a bit complicated case and I wouldn't really blame the court. They were asked to rule on a copyright violation, and copyright despite its bad rep has some good reason to exist. The problem is that companies such as Elsevier have found a way to abuse the system by gaming 3-4 things at once: public universities, research grants, citation/research reputation, and copyright. They are not really s monopoly and it's d…
Ironically, the creation of monopolies over individual publications is the express purpose of copyright.
That is, of course, antropomorphising copyright in a common figure of speech. It would be much more logical to say that humans are subjective here, thus to appear in subject position of the sentence. The officers of the law instrumentalize the law. "the law" is objective only in a figurative sense, but it is a type of procedure. The courts have a good reason to lawfully observe the intent and purpose of the legislator. The legislature had a good reason to law copyright. That's what I think you said. But there is no good reason for legislature to uphold the law.
Meanhile, Elsevier has failed tremendously at protecting the IP. If that constitutes breach of contract, the contract may be suspended.
This would be circular reasoning, if the court is supposed to offer such protection. There is hope they will continue to fail.
But there is no hope that a state who likewise paywalls public documents like certain laws and statuts could see its conflict of interest.
---
To be derisive: It is ironic that an ex-sovjet country citizen would fight against centralized pooling of resources. Sovjets could not make a five year plan work, but the free market can handle a 70-year plan? Give me a break.