Elsevier en lugar de negociar con las universidades propone un spywere contra Sci-Hub | Universo Abierto

From Google’s English:  “However, instead of offering transparent open access contracts on fair terms, Elsevier has adopted a different strategy in the fight against shadow libraries like Sci-Hub. These must be fought as “cybercrime”, if necessary also with technological means. Within the framework of  The Scholarly Networks Security Initiative (SNSI) , founded in conjunction with other major publishers, Elsevier is campaigning for libraries to upgrade with security technology. In a SNSI webinar titled” Cybersecurity Landscape – Protecting the Scholarly Infrastructure “Hosted by two senior executives at Elsevier, one speaker recommended that publishers develop their own proxy or proxy plug-in for libraries to access more (usage) data (“develop or subsidize a low-cost proxy or proxy plug-in). existing proxies ”). With the help of an “analysis engine”, not only could the location of access be better delineated, but biometric data (eg typing speed) or striking usage patterns (eg a student pharmacy suddenly interested in astrophysics). Any doubt that this software could also be used – if not primarily – against shadow libraries like SCI-HUB was dispelled by the next speaker.”

Is the SNSI the new PRISM?

“This past week, these public relations efforts were dialed up a notch or ten to a whole new level. At an SNSI webinar entitled „Cybersecurity Landscape – Protecting the Scholarly Infrastructure“, hosted by two Elsevier employees, one of the presenters suggested „develop or subsidize a low cost proxy or a plug-in to existing proxies“ in order to collect user data. That user data, it was explained, could be analyzed with an “Analysis Engine” to track biometric data (e.g., typing speed) or suspicious behavior (e.g., a pharmacology student being suspiciously interested in astrophysics). The angle towards Sci-Hub was confirmed by the next speaker, an Ex-FBI agent and security analyst.

Considering the track record of academic publishers, this reeks strongly of PR attempts to ‘soften the target’, i.e., to make installing publisher spyware on university servers sound less outrageous than it actually is. After the PRISM debacle, the publishers now seem to have learned from their PR mistakes. This time, there is no ‘pitbull’ around. This time, there is only a strange article in a major newspaper, a shady institute where it appears hard to find out who founded it, who is running it and who funds it.

SNSI is an apparent PR project aimed at compromising, not strengthening, network security at research institutions. However, unlike with PRISM, this time the PR effort may pay off.”

Should Knowledge Be Free? – YouTube

“Should academic research be behind paywalls? Researchers and peer reviewers earn nothing for their work, and yet academic publishers boast enormous profit margins every year from subscription fees to journals. Especially during a global pandemic, is it right for scientific research to be pay-to-read?

Sci-Hub is an illegal website that offers almost all academic publications for free, created by Alexandra Elbakyan, who I interview in this video. Aaron Swartz, like Alexandra, felt that information should be freely available on the Internet. He ended his own life after being charged with wire fraud, because he illegally downloaded academic articles from JSTOR. What is the way forward? Pre-prints? Researchgate? Have your say below. A huge thank you to Alexandra Elbakyan and Rachel Atwood (@racatiwood) for giving up their time so generously on two occasions (due to Zoom failing the first time). We talked for a while longer, and whether you agree with what Alexandra’s doing or not, her accomplishments are quite staggering. …”

Improving access and delivery of academic content – a survey of current & emerging trends | Musings about librarianship

“While allowing users to gain access to paywalled academic content aka delivery services is often seen to be less sexy than discovery it is still an important part of the researcher workflow that is worth looking at. In particular, I will argue that in the past few years we have seen a renewed interest in this part of the workflow and may potentially start to see some big changes in the way we provide access to academic content in the near future.

Note: The OA discovery and delivery front has changed a lot since 2017, with Unpaywall been a big part of the story, but for this blog post I will focus on delivery aspects of paywalled content. 1.0 Access and delivery – an age old problem

 

1.1 RA21, Seamless Access and getFTR

 

1.2 Campus Activated Subscriber Access (CASA)

1.3 Browser extensions/”Access Brokers” 1.4 Content syndication partnership between Springer Nature and ResearchGate (new) 1.5 Is the sun slowing setting on library link resolvers? 1.6 The Sci-hub effect?

1.7 Privacy implications …”

Killing two birds with one stone: Beating the pirates and giving users the experience they deserve

“If it wasn’t the case before, ‘digital first’ and remote access to content and services is now the strategy of choice for most places of learning. If you’ve spent a ton of cash on developing online content, the last thing you want is someone to come along and steal it. Unfortunately, piracy is very much alive and kicking.

So why are learners and researchers still turning to free and pirate sites for content?

The simple answer is that it’s easier for library users to get the information they need. The user journey on many publisher websites is complex and inconsistent. Until now, very little attention has been paid to this part of the publishing cycle and it’s what we’ve come to know as the ‘missing link’.

Our presenters will discuss why it is important to put a simple, seamless user access journey firmly on your product roadmap, ensuring that ‘login via your institution’ is the first login choice. We’ll also explain how OpenAthens can work with publisher’s product and development teams to improve the user access experience….”

Gold, green, and black open access – Björk – 2017 – Learned Publishing – Wiley Online Library

“Key points

 

The debate about open access has until now focused on the gold (journals) versus the green route (manuscript self?archival).
Recently an even more disruptive form of OA has emerged, in the form of illegal article copies retrievable from academic social networks or pirate sites.
Illegal, or “black open access”, provides access to a large part of the pay?walled article output which cannot be found in repositories….”

Improving access and delivery of academic content – a survey of current & emerging trends | Musings about librarianship

“Some readers might be thinking that this might be a odd time for us to start focusing on improving user experiences with delivery given that the coming of open access might make a lot of this moot.

 

There are two answers to this. Firstly open access even in the most optimistic of projections will still have a decade or more to go and is likely to cover only journal articles. Libraries will still need to provide access to other licensed resources (A&I indexes, image archives etc) that will not be covered by Open Access.

 

The other reason is that some content providers even in a open access world would still want users to authenticate, so they can track usage and users.”

Improving access and delivery of academic content – a survey of current & emerging trends | Musings about librarianship

“Some readers might be thinking that this might be a odd time for us to start focusing on improving user experiences with delivery given that the coming of open access might make a lot of this moot.

 

There are two answers to this. Firstly open access even in the most optimistic of projections will still have a decade or more to go and is likely to cover only journal articles. Libraries will still need to provide access to other licensed resources (A&I indexes, image archives etc) that will not be covered by Open Access.

 

The other reason is that some content providers even in a open access world would still want users to authenticate, so they can track usage and users.”

Beyond Sci-Hub: Cyber Challenges for the Scholarly Communications Industry – Against the Grain

“Given recent reporting in the press,1 it seems that the legitimacy and credibility of Sci-Hub is no longer a matter for debate.  However, the challenge of how to address the continuing threat Sci-Hub poses to authors, societies, university presses, and other publishers reliant on the royalties derived from book sales and subscription income remains — and is connected to the much wider challenge of cybercrime….

Collectively, we have a responsibility to safeguard and manage a successful online researcher experience by ensuring institutional and individual access is enabled to high quality, licensed, peer reviewed publications;  that data is protected;  and entitlements from licensed institutions are safeguarded.  For example, publishers and librarians worked together as part of the RA21 initiative, now called seamlessaccess.org, to make access to articles easier for researchers using their institutional logins when they are not on campus.  As this becomes implemented across platforms and publishers, it will also negate the need for researchers to log in each time they move between publishers’ websites. …

One way that our community is looking to address and tackle these issues is through the Scholarly Networks Security Initiative (SNSI). …”