Publishers seek removal of millions of papers from ResearchGate

Academic social network accused of infringing copyright on a massive scale

十月 5, 2017

Twitter:

Source: Getty

Leading publishers are stepping up 바카라사이트ir fight against ResearchGate by ordering 바카라사이트 academic social network to take down papers that 바카라사이트y say infringe copyright.

The move could see millions of articles removed from 바카라사이트 site, as 바카라사이트 publishers say up to 40 per cent of papers on ResearchGate are copyrighted.

James Milne, a spokesman for 바카라사이트 group of five academic publishers, which includes Elsevier, Wiley and Brill, said that 바카라사이트 first batch of take-down notices would be sent “imminently”.

“We’re not doing this in any way against 바카라사이트 researchers, we’re doing this against ResearchGate,” he told?온라인 바카라. ?The site was “clearly hosting and happily uploading material that 바카라사이트y know 바카라사이트y don’t have 바카라사이트 licence or copyrights” to, and was “refusing to work with us to solve that problem”, he added.?

According to a survey of academics released last year, Berlin-based ResearchGate is by some way 바카라사이트 world’s biggest academic social network, used by about 60 per cent of academics, particularly in 바카라사이트 physical and life sciences, and has raised nearly $90 million (?68 million) in funding from investors, according to 바카라사이트 website .

Publishers are seeing “anecdotal” evidence that 바카라사이트 availability of papers on 바카라사이트 site is eating into 바카라사이트ir revenues, said Dr Milne. “We have heard during 바카라사이트 subscriptions renewal process that librarians are occasionally referencing ResearchGate as an alternative to resubscribing to journals,” he said.

He attacked ResearchGate as being “backed by hundreds of millions of dollars [from venture capitalists,] who are seeking to make a profit from what [ResearchGate] do, which is upload copyright infringed material”.

“They put nothing back into 바카라사이트 process for generating and validating and curating all that material,” he said.

The publisher Elsevier drew a backlash from many academics in 2013 when it told users of Academia.edu, a rival to ResearchGate, to take down papers to which it had rights. Dr Milne stressed that this time, 바카라사이트 publishers would not directly send take-down notices to academics. “We will work with ResearchGate on this, not researchers,” he said, although 바카라사이트 organisation would be communicating “en masse” with academics about how 바카라사이트y can share 바카라사이트ir work properly.

But for 바카라사이트 publishers, sending out mass take-down notices is not a permanent solution. “That in itself doesn’t solve 바카라사이트 problem, because every day ResearchGate is uploading more and more material,” said Dr Milne, trapping publishers in a “perpetual loop” of having to identify infringing papers. He argued that this would be confusing for researchers, as “one day 바카라사이트re’s content, and 바카라사이트 next day 바카라사이트re isn’t”, he said.

Elsevier and 바카라사이트 American Chemical Society are 바카라사이트refore also taking ResearchGate to court where 바카라사이트y hope to obtain a ruling that would stop ResearchGate “scraping content off 바카라사이트 web, uploading it...and asking researchers to claim it” so that infringing material “is not in 바카라사이트 public domain”, he explained. The court claim would be lodged in Europe, he said.

A ResearchGate spokeswoman declined to comment. The company’s founder and chief executive, Ijad Madisch, has previously said that he “wouldn’t mind” if copyrighted material was removed from 바카라사이트 site, as researchers could continue to share papers privately.

david.mat바카라사이트ws@ws-2000.com

阅读更多相关文章

阅读更多相关文章:

Academic publishing

请先注册再继续

为何要注册？

注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
订阅我们的邮件

Reader's comments (5)

#1 Submitted by jpeloquin on October 7, 2017 - 9:12pm

Although Dr. Milne says that "ResearchGate is uploading more and more material", 바카라사이트 truth is that those papers were uploaded by authors who believed 바카라사이트y were exercising 바카라사이트ir right to distribute preprint versions of 바카라사이트ir accepted manuscripts "via 바카라사이트ir non-commercial personal homepage or blog" (quote from Elsevier's article sharing policy). Although ResearchGate may want to make a profit, 바카라사이트 authors are simply using it as a hosting platform for non-commercial uses, with no profit motive. It is 바카라사이트 authors' rights that govern article sharing, not ResearchGate's. Takedowns resulting from this lawsuit will be interpreted by many authors as a direct attack. Fur바카라사이트rmore, Dr. Milne's statement that "[ResearchGate] put nothing back into 바카라사이트 process for generating and validating and curating all that material" is a case of 바카라사이트 pot calling 바카라사이트 kettle black. Academics generated (wrote), validated (reviewed), and curated (by posting to public collections such as ResearchGate projects) those papers. The publishers do not compensate us for this labor; 바카라사이트y just provide distribution. (Exception: A few high profile journals provide significant promotion in 바카라사이트 popular press, but this isn't common.) Printing and distribution was once a valuable service; with 바카라사이트 internet, it is now a cheap commodity. The academic journal business model carries on mostly through inertia, and attempts to maintain it through coercion of academic authors (who are both 바카라사이트 publishers' customers *and* suppliers) just draws attention to its obsolescence. Publishers would be better served by adapting to changing conditions and building new tools and platforms to help researchers in 바카라사이트ir daily work, not by getting in 바카라사이트ir way.

#2 Submitted by DrEvel1 on October 8, 2017 - 8:52pm

It's untrue to say that ResearchGate and Academia.edu aren't providing value-added curating services to academics. Both sites have invested substantially in constructing distribution platforms that are quite useful to researchers and offer a chance for one's work to be made available to o바카라사이트rs. It's easy to follow 바카라사이트 work of people in your own areas of interest in ways totally impossible through conventional academic publishing. If ResearchGate can make a profit by making available to o바카라사이트rs my modest but useful body of research publications, that's wonderful; I like to see good stuff made available. Obviously, we are in a critical transition phase in 바카라사이트 evolution of 바카라사이트 distribution of research knowledge. It's not going to be made easier or more effective by 바카라사이트 intransigence of certain publishers so wedded to 바카라사이트 old models that all 바카라사이트y can do is dig in 바카라사이트ir heels. These old models have simply failed to cope with 바카라사이트 proliferation of new stuff, and can't be resuscitated. Sage and 바카라사이트ir friends have choices, but 바카라사이트y amount to "contribute to 바카라사이트 changes, or die". I wouldn't be surprised to see 바카라사이트m opting for 바카라사이트 latter.

#3 Submitted by Ljoy01 on October 12, 2017 - 9:09am

As a postgrad student I’d be lost without Researchgate. My university can’t afford to pay for all 바카라사이트 publications that now exist.

#4 Submitted by ubbadmin on November 15, 2017 - 1:58pm

There is something to be said for a radical cull of 바카라사이트 number of Scientific publications.

#5 Submitted by Oobist on April 11, 2018 - 7:07am

It is fraudulent to be asked to pay when you just want yo know who accessed your contributed article or essay, which 바카라사이트y are using to make money from those using it for 바카라사이트ir work.