“That means that I, as a taxpayer, [am] paying for the research and paying again for the benefit of reading it.”
From the WaPo:
“That means that I, as a taxpayer, [am] paying for the research and paying again for the benefit of reading it.”
From the WaPo:
It is never a copyright violation to READ copyrighted material. It is a copyright violation to claim it as your own, or to profit from its reproduction. Ms. Albakyan has done neither. She has done electronically what a public library does with hard copy.
Website is https://sci-hub.io/ if anybody wants to take a look.
Hope this helps.
Just a thought.
VicB3
If estimates are any where near correct over 50% of these articles make claims that are wrong in the sense that they can not be replicated. Citizens should request their congressman to require that the data sets used in papers funded by taxpayers be placed in a public repository.
Many, if not most of these articles were indeed funded by taxpayer funds. In which case they should be in the public domain.