Cutouts


Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science? | Science | The Guardian  

added about 2 months ago by @icyflame ARCHIVES

elsevier sci-hub copyright access    

Scientists occasionally questioned the fairness of this hugely profitable business to which they supplied their work for free, but it was university librarians who first realised the trap in the market Maxwell had created. The librarians used university funds to buy journals on behalf of scientists. Maxwell was well aware of this. “Scientists are not as price-conscious as other professionals, mainly because they are not spending their own money,” he told his publication Global Business in a 1988 interview. And since there was no way to swap one journal for another, cheaper one, the result was, Maxwell continued, “a perpetual financing machine”. Librarians were locked into a series of thousands of tiny monopolies. There were now more than a million scientific articles being published a year, and they had to buy all of them at whatever price the publishers wanted.

Cutouts is an open source application. Code licensed under the MIT license. Copyright 2018 Siddharth Kannan