Kosmo Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 The archives of more than 1,200 journals are now available for limited free reading by the public, JSTOR announced today. Anyone can sign up for a JSTOR account and read up to three articles for free every two weeks. This is a major expansion of the Register & Read program, following a 10-month test, during which more than 150,000 people registered for access to an initial set of 76 journals. The new additions bring more than 4.5 million articles from nearly 800 scholarly societies, university presses, and academic publishers into the Register & Read offerings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil61 Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 I'm not sure about elsewhere but in the U.S. some public libraries (Portland OR, NYC & Austin TX for example) have online access to JSTOR which you can access via proxy from home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klingan Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 This feels real bad after reading this story (International Herald Tribune). "Aaron Swartz, the 26-year-old technology wunderkind [...] killed himself on Friday, [...] In 2011, he was arrested and accused of using M.I.T. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melvadius Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 I suppose the sticking point is why he felt the need to break into an academic archive that is already available to bonafide academic researchers all be at a fixed price and with appropriate citation. It seems like something done in support of a plagarists charter than for any 'honourable' reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klingan Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 I suppose the sticking point is why he felt the need to break into an academic archive that is already available to bonafide academic researchers all be at a fixed price and with appropriate citation. It seems like something done in support of a plagarists charter than for any 'honourable' reason. Oh yes, I don't agree one bit with his methods (that it must be for free, because it should be free, because everything non physical should be free...in absurdum) or with what he did (and I might add that I have very little sympathy for film and music companies loosing money to pirates). It's not like researchers make a lot of money from their very hard work - fact is that you almost need to pay people to publish you. I actually even doubt jStore makes that much money to be honest. Even so, threatening him with such a draconian punishment (35 years in prison and millions of dollars in fines) that he committed suicide, what's the point really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil61 Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 I suppose the sticking point is why he felt the need to break into an academic archive that is already available to bonafide academic researchers all be at a fixed price and with appropriate citation. It seems like something done in support of a plagarists charter than for any 'honourable' reason. Oh yes, I don't agree one bit with his methods (that it must be for free, because it should be free, because everything non physical should be free...in absurdum) or with what he did (and I might add that I have very little sympathy for film and music companies loosing money to pirates). It's not like researchers make a lot of money from their very hard work - fact is that you almost need to pay people to publish you. I actually even doubt jStore makes that much money to be honest. Even so, threatening him with such a draconian punishment (35 years in prison and millions of dollars in fines) that he committed suicide, what's the point really? I think the federal prosecutor was a bit overzealous here but in reality it's doubtful he would have been sentenced--if found guilty--anywhere near 35 years in prison. Apparently he had suffered from serious depression in the past, that coupled with the stress of a trial was more than the poor guy could handle. I'm not in support of stealing but I also feel little sympathy for film and music companies, the artists are a different story. I've got two thousand or more vinyl albums, cds & even tapes that record companies have overcharged while giving artists in general only a small % of the profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil61 Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 (edited) I suppose the sticking point is why he felt the need to break into an academic archive that is already available to bonafide academic researchers all be at a fixed price and with appropriate citation. It seems like something done in support of a plagarists charter than for any 'honourable' reason. I think only recently--after years of being asked to do so--has Jstor offered independent scholars & the average layperson a chance at access [only a small % of major public libraries offer Jstor]. There is an argument some use--and I think Aaron Schwartz was part of this movement--that all academic knowledge should be made accessible to the public. I'm sympathetic to that concept, its dissemination add value to society in a way that entertainment [or art] via music and film don't. Edited January 14, 2013 by Virgil61 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmo Posted January 15, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2013 JSTOR did not pursue any charges towards him, so it was basically a victimless crime. And for the persecution to ask for such a harsh punishment for academic articles is ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klingan Posted January 15, 2013 Report Share Posted January 15, 2013 JSTOR did not pursue any charges towards him, so it was basically a victimless crime. And for the persecution to ask for such a harsh punishment for academic articles is ridiculous. It's ridiculous for any crime that does not inflict serious harm on one or more persons. It's actually about 4 times longer in jail than you can get in Sweden (in practice) for anything... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil61 Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 (edited) JSTOR did not pursue any charges towards him, so it was basically a victimless crime. And for the persecution to ask for such a harsh punishment for academic articles is ridiculous. There was really no danger in Schwartz ever being given the full sentence. He was charged, among other things, with wire fraud a crime that is used to move drug money, defraud investors of millions, etc. which explains the heavy sentence. Informal sentencing guidelines used by judges would've suggested a very minimal sentence, I'm only guessing but probably under 2-3 years at worst. Judges are free to ignore guidelines but its unlikely in this case. Prosecutors can huff and puff and suggest anything they want but they don't determine the sentence or of course even the guilt of the party. I did a quick glance on Wikipedia and it stated his defense counsel had already gotten an informal agreement by the prosecutor to a plea bargain of 6 months prison time & he nearly had a plea bargain with no prison time but for the fact MIT--one of the victims--would not sign off on it (JSTOR btw did). Edited January 18, 2013 by Virgil61 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.