They are in the public domain in a printed copy. You can copy from them, reprint them, make books of them and charge for it. You can scan them and put them online, the whole millions of them. Yet that does take work and who should pay for this work? Is it not a great service to mankind that these documents are being made available from the comfort of your home?
I do not understand one simle thing. JSTOR is not for profit. Are people therefore saying that it is making a profit? If yes, the action is understandable, but if not, as much as I am and was anoyed to face a JSTOR paywall and as much as there is an argument to make such paywall means tested, what are people actually saying? That this non profit organisation should not be able to existantially support itself?
Yes, government should support it rather than spend money on wars, but, I simply do not understand why anyone would want to kill off a non profit organisation.
How many of you are going to read these articles? How many of the general population would want to read these articles? Save for the professors and students how many would seek to even attempt to go through a journal article.
It just seems, frankly, that a self interested ideology of disdain for copyrights has sprung roots in Hacker News and man has stoped considering long term effects, focusing instead on their temorary pleasure of the now.
>They are in the public domain in a printed copy. You can copy from them, reprint them, make books of them and charge for it. You can scan them and put them online, the whole millions of them. Yet that does take work and who should pay for this work?
Whoever wants to. But doing so does not give you copyright over the content.
>I do not understand one simle thing. JSTOR is not for profit. Are people therefore saying that it is making a profit? If yes, the action is understandable, but if not, as much as I am and was anoyed to face a JSTOR paywall and as much as there is an argument to make such paywall means tested, what are people actually saying? That this non profit organisation should not be able to existantially support itself?
$19 per copy is extremely expensive, considering their expenses after the document is scanned are close to 0 (and as we can see, hundreds of people are willing to do it for free).
I do not understand one simle thing. JSTOR is not for profit. Are people therefore saying that it is making a profit? If yes, the action is understandable, but if not, as much as I am and was anoyed to face a JSTOR paywall and as much as there is an argument to make such paywall means tested, what are people actually saying? That this non profit organisation should not be able to existantially support itself?
Yes, government should support it rather than spend money on wars, but, I simply do not understand why anyone would want to kill off a non profit organisation.
How many of you are going to read these articles? How many of the general population would want to read these articles? Save for the professors and students how many would seek to even attempt to go through a journal article.
It just seems, frankly, that a self interested ideology of disdain for copyrights has sprung roots in Hacker News and man has stoped considering long term effects, focusing instead on their temorary pleasure of the now.