[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Publishers seek removal of millions of papers from ResearchGate

has someone written the history of LCHC and xmca and of its pioneering
technical/socio-cultural "educational" innovations?
Xmcy was the first electronic list I ever signed up to.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of mike cole
Répondre à : "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Date : dimanche, 8 octobre 2017 22:35
À : "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Objet : [Xmca-l] Re: Publishers seek removal of millions of papers
from	ResearchGate

Alfredo, Anne Nelly et al ---

The difficulties to accessing academic research at play in this discussion
motivates my long time treatment of xlchc/xmca as an *educational *
If you check out the cluster map of xmca that tells you where people are
connecting from, it gives you are pretty good idea of who has interest and
access. ( https://clustrmaps.com/site/17i )

A LOT of those visitors do not have access to the articles, never mind the
books, that we seek to discuss here in order to educate ourselves and our
students in fundamental questions about human development in its cultural,
historical, social contexts. If we do not post such materials, we are
sealed off from each other as in the past.

Lets hope that going forward, MCA and this discussion group can hold itself
together as an educational community sufficiently to ward off the digital

Its not clear how to get to open access, but this has been lchc's way of


On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Glassman, Michael <glassman.13@osu.edu>

> The trouble we are facing is that ademia.edu and researchgate are not
> organizations that were formed to serve the public good. They will only
> function as Open Educational Resources as long as it suits their needs.
> They are instead being funded by large amounts of venture capital.
> Eventually these people are going to want their profits.  What is scary
> we cannot know what this means.  What happened with Facebook and the
> election is the canary in the coal mine (much bigger than a canary
> though).  For those who don't know what happened not so good sources used
> targeted advertising of Facebook, and my guess is Google as well, to
> manipulate outcomes.  Targeted advertising is when you discuss a trip to
> Bahamas in a gmail discussion and then the next time you log on to gmail
> there is an advertisement for a hotel in the Bahamas. Up to now it has
> freaky but not really dangerous.  There is not much discussion of exactly
> what happened other than Russian (and my guess is other groups) used
> targeted advertising.  A guess how that happened. People all over the
> country were talking about Hillary Clinton's emails in the last few weeks
> of the campaign. Facebook is able to aggregate the people who were
> talking about this on their Facebook pages. They are also able to locate
> them according to region. Organizations then use this information to
> people specifically in swing states with advertisements that are
> as news items. So on Monday you write a comment, "I really wonder what is
> going on with Hillary's emails" and on Tuesday you get a directed
> advertisement with claims what is happening with Hillary's emails that
> claims legitimacy. This is incredibly powerful.  Mark Zuckerberg the
> founder of Facebook as said he won't allow this to happen again (at first
> he denied it) but I'm not so sure how.  Targeted advertising is how
> Facebook and Google make a lot of their money.
> I worry about the things academia.edu and researchgate.net might do (full
> disclosure, I am on both because they are becoming the only way to reach
> many fellow researchers). What happens when the funds that have been
> feeding them money demand their profit?  Nobody would have predicted what
> happened with targeted advertising. How will research dissemination be
> manipulated?  I don't know what the solution to this is but we need to be
> very careful.
> I question why universities did not step into the breach, to create Open
> Educational Resources that were not beholden to profit. It's not like
> didn't know this was coming and OER was a possibility.
> Michael
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@
> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of PERRET-CLERMONT Anne-Nelly
> Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2017 9:20 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>;
> xmca-l@ucsd.edu
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Publishers seek removal of millions of papers from
> ResearchGate
> Thanks for these very interesting links.
> The new political line of the Swiss National Research Foundation (SNSF)
> these issues is very interesting:
> "The results of research financed by public funds should be published
> electronically so that they are freely and immediately available without
> charge and can thus be reused by third parties, since they are considered
> as a public good. In support of the principle of Open Access, the SNSF
> expects grantees to make the results of the research projects it has
> supported accessible to the public".
> This will concern almost all scientists in Switzerland. See:
> http://www.snf.ch/en/theSNSF/research-policies/open-access/
> Pages/default.as
> px
> Anne-Nelly
> Prof. em. Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont
> Institut de psychologie et éducation Faculté des lettres et sciences
> humaines Université de Neuchâtel Espace L. Agassiz 1,  CH- 2000 Neuchâtel
> (Switzerland) <http://www2.unine.ch/ipe/publications/anne_nelly_
> perret_clermont>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Alfredo Jornet Gil <
> a.j.gil@iped.uio.no> Répondre à : "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <
> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> Date : dimanche, 8 octobre 2017 13:31 À : "
> xmca-l@ucsd.edu" <xmca-l@ucsd.edu>, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <
> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> Objet : [Xmca-l] Re: Publishers seek removal of
> millions of
> papers  from    ResearchGate
> That's a complex matter, Peter. Thanks for sharing. I wonder what the
> views of others are. I am still forming mine, but would like to
> with another resource to do so, an article from The Guardian on
> business scientific publishing
> https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/
> profitable-business-scienti
> fic-publishing-bad-for-science
> Alfredo
> ________________________________________
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> on behalf of Peter Smagorinsky <smago@uga.edu>
> Sent: 07 October 2017 17:31
> To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Publishers seek removal of millions of papers from
> ResearchGate
> https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/publishers-seek-removal-
> millions-
> papers-researchgate
> Publishers seek removal of millions of papers from ResearchGate
> Academic social network accused of infringing copyright on a massive
> Leading publishers are stepping up their fight against ResearchGate by
> ordering the academic social network to take down papers that they say
> infringe copyright.
> The move could see millions of articles removed from the site, as the
> publishers say up to 40 per cent of papers on ResearchGate are
> James Milne, a spokesman for the group of five academic publishers, which
> includes Elsevier, Wiley and Brill, said that the first batch of
> notices would be sent "imminently".
> "We're not doing this in any way against the researchers, we're doing
> against ResearchGate," he told Times Higher Education. The site was
> "clearly hosting and happily uploading material that they know they don't
> have the license 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 the world's biggest academic social network,
> used by about 60 per cent of academics, particularly in the physical and
> life sciences, and has raised nearly $90 million (£68 million) in funding
> from investors, according to the website Crunchbase.
> Publishers are seeing "anecdotal" evidence that the availability of
> on the site is eating into their revenues, said Dr Milne. "We have heard
> during the 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 the process for generating and validating and
> curating all that material," he said.
> The publisher Elsevier drew a backlash from many academics in 2013 when
> told users of Academia.edu, a rival to ResearchGate, to take down papers
> which it had rights. Dr Milne stressed that this time, the publishers
> not directly send take-down notices to academics. "We will work with
> ResearchGate on this, not researchers," he said, although the
> would be communicating "en masse" with academics about how they can share
> their work properly.
> But for the publishers, sending out mass take-down notices is not a
> permanent solution. "That in itself doesn't solve the problem, because
> every day ResearchGate is uploading more and more material," said Dr
> trapping publishers in a "perpetual loop" of having to identify
> papers. He argued that this would be confusing for researchers, as "one
> there's content, and the next day there isn't", he said.
> Elsevier and the American Chemical Society are therefore also taking
> ResearchGate to court where they hope to obtain a ruling that would stop
> ResearchGate "scraping content off the web, uploading it...and asking
> researchers to claim it" so that infringing material "is not in the
> domain", he explained. The court claim would be lodged in Europe, he
> A ResearchGate spokeswoman declined to comment. The company's founder and
> chief executive, Ijad Madisch, has previously said that he "wouldn't
> if copyrighted material was removed from the site, as researchers could
> continue to share papers privately.
> david.matthews@timeshighereducation.com<mailto:david.matthews@
> timeshighered
> ucation.com>