Citing paywalled articles accessed via illegal web sharingAre academic ethics global or local?How to publish...
Hilchos Shabbos English Sefer
Line of Bones to Travel and Conform to Curve (Like Train on a Track, Snake...)
When do I have to declare that I want to twin my spell?
Which communication protocol is used in AdLib sound card?
Non-Cancer terminal illness that can affect young (age 10-13) girls?
Python Pandas - difference between 'loc' and 'where'?
Is this ordinary workplace experiences for a job in Software Engineering?
Does dispel magic end a master's control over their undead?
Why was Lupin comfortable with saying Voldemort's name?
Why would space fleets be aligned?
How much mayhem could I cause as a sentient fish?
Picture with grey box as background
Is a new boolean field better than null reference when a value can be meaningfully absent?
Why did the villain in the first Men in Black movie care about Earth's Cockroaches?
What makes papers publishable in top-tier journals?
Why did Democrats in the Senate oppose the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (2019 S.130)?
What is the difference between rolling more dice versus fewer dice?
Why publish a research paper when a blog post or a lecture slide can have more citation count than a journal paper?
Should I reinstall Linux when changing the laptop's CPU?
Ellipses aligned on the same boundary point
Potential client has a problematic employee I can't work with
Crontab: Ubuntu running script (noob)
Dilemma of explaining to interviewer that he is the reason for declining second interview
Why are all my replica super soldiers young adults or old teenagers?
Citing paywalled articles accessed via illegal web sharing
Are academic ethics global or local?How to publish an academic book but make the PDF freely available online?How to make your paper's materials available online? (personal webpages, Institutional server, etc?)What makes you keep on reading articles in your non-English native language, while the same information might be published in English?Display of Publications for Personal WebsiteHow Scopus CSAB plan to evaluate a submitted journal's citedness in Scopus?Does a bibliography-only citation count like a regular citation for the author?How does LibGen/SciHub affect researchers' research and publishing process?Uncited general claims followed by cited specific claims – is this an accepted writing style?How to handle an obsession about being 100% academically honestHow to find references for known facts?
There are a few sites which offer paid articles for free. It’s something unethical, especially for those who upload to that site, but for me, it’s good for expanding knowledge.
As a readers, can we cite those documents, and can the editorial board know that I’m using those articles?
publications citations ethics
New contributor
add a comment |
There are a few sites which offer paid articles for free. It’s something unethical, especially for those who upload to that site, but for me, it’s good for expanding knowledge.
As a readers, can we cite those documents, and can the editorial board know that I’m using those articles?
publications citations ethics
New contributor
5
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
20 hours ago
5
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
18 hours ago
10
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
16 hours ago
4
@tomasz : also, in many jurisdictions, it's not the downloading is what is illegal (or at least enforceably illegal), but the uploading to such sites.
– vsz
8 hours ago
add a comment |
There are a few sites which offer paid articles for free. It’s something unethical, especially for those who upload to that site, but for me, it’s good for expanding knowledge.
As a readers, can we cite those documents, and can the editorial board know that I’m using those articles?
publications citations ethics
New contributor
There are a few sites which offer paid articles for free. It’s something unethical, especially for those who upload to that site, but for me, it’s good for expanding knowledge.
As a readers, can we cite those documents, and can the editorial board know that I’m using those articles?
publications citations ethics
publications citations ethics
New contributor
New contributor
edited 53 mins ago
Syafiq Zaidi
New contributor
asked yesterday
Syafiq ZaidiSyafiq Zaidi
17029
17029
New contributor
New contributor
5
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
20 hours ago
5
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
18 hours ago
10
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
16 hours ago
4
@tomasz : also, in many jurisdictions, it's not the downloading is what is illegal (or at least enforceably illegal), but the uploading to such sites.
– vsz
8 hours ago
add a comment |
5
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
20 hours ago
5
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
18 hours ago
10
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
16 hours ago
4
@tomasz : also, in many jurisdictions, it's not the downloading is what is illegal (or at least enforceably illegal), but the uploading to such sites.
– vsz
8 hours ago
5
5
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
20 hours ago
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
20 hours ago
5
5
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
18 hours ago
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
18 hours ago
10
10
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
16 hours ago
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
16 hours ago
4
4
@tomasz : also, in many jurisdictions, it's not the downloading is what is illegal (or at least enforceably illegal), but the uploading to such sites.
– vsz
8 hours ago
@tomasz : also, in many jurisdictions, it's not the downloading is what is illegal (or at least enforceably illegal), but the uploading to such sites.
– vsz
8 hours ago
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
16
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
22 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
15 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
14 hours ago
"Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website." -- additionally, at least in some jurisdictions, distributing a link to a pirated version is outright illegal.
– aland
9 hours ago
add a comment |
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
8
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
yesterday
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
yesterday
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
yesterday
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
17 hours ago
1
@guifa: MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR --- I don't know how that would apply to me (and I don't really care either) because I have literally tens of thousands of photocopied papers and paper preprints obtained since the mid 1980s (arguably the early 1960s if you count the preprint archive I received from a well known researcher in my field in the mid 1990s), from many dozens of libraries, and other than an occasional library stamp on a photocopied page or remembering where I got the paper from, I would have no way of knowing. (continued)
– Dave L Renfro
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
11
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
23 hours ago
add a comment |
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if legal access isn't plausible.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
EDIT: I'm flabbergasted that a factual correct answer has four down votes. Especially as an answer that appeared afterwards, with essentially the same message is being up-voted. It makes be question why I bother helping people.
13
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
yesterday
7
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
yesterday
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
yesterday
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
22 hours ago
7
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
19 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
5
And to offer the contrasting take: Pirates steal nothing, as no thing is lost by the publisher. They are breaking ineffective and socially harmful laws to create net benefit for the society. Intellectual monopoly laws are a way of restricting property rights of people for no good benefit, and in a largely unenforceable way, which is used as an arbitrary punishment mechanism for little benefit to anyone but lawyers and certain big rent-seeking companies.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
1
Also, this does not really answer the question.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
This reads more like a criticism of the question than an answer. The OP already stated that they deem the act of publishing the documents unethical. Could you clarify in which way "is really not a valid question" provides a useful answer or at least a credible frame challenge?
– Ruther Rendommeleigh
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f125570%2fciting-paywalled-articles-accessed-via-illegal-web-sharing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
16
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
22 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
15 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
14 hours ago
"Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website." -- additionally, at least in some jurisdictions, distributing a link to a pirated version is outright illegal.
– aland
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
16
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
22 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
15 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
14 hours ago
"Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website." -- additionally, at least in some jurisdictions, distributing a link to a pirated version is outright illegal.
– aland
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
Nobody will know how you have gained access to the article. Hence, feel free to cite articles found via illegal sources.
It might not even be illegal to download content from the website; check your local laws and Berne convention (if your country is signed up) to be sure. In any case, this is unlikely to affect your reputation in any way.
Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website. The pirate website is usually not the publisher.
You might not want to be vocal about using such a website. Some people still see it as ethically questionable. That said, using various pirate websites is increasingly common, and the status of many academic publishers among academians seems to have taken some hits, so many researchers will not care about how you get your articles.
You also have the ethics tag on the question. The ethics of pirating digital material are a polarized subject. You might want to do your own research here, or ask a new question for what the main arguments for both sides are, if it has not been asked already. Some people say that pirating material is analogous to physical theft, while others say that intellectual monopoly laws are bad and breaking them creates more good than ill. (I happen to think the laws are far too strong and harm humanity, and should be weakened substantially or entirely removed.) I strongly suggest reading on the matter until you have found strong statements of both points of view to come to an informed decision.
answered yesterday
Tommi BranderTommi Brander
3,97411332
3,97411332
16
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
22 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
15 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
14 hours ago
"Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website." -- additionally, at least in some jurisdictions, distributing a link to a pirated version is outright illegal.
– aland
9 hours ago
add a comment |
16
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
22 hours ago
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
15 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
14 hours ago
"Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website." -- additionally, at least in some jurisdictions, distributing a link to a pirated version is outright illegal.
– aland
9 hours ago
16
16
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
22 hours ago
Another point is that some journals allow authors to self-archive and embargo periods are variable, so depending on the age of the article and the author, the pirate site might just be hosting a copy that is available elsewhere.
– anonymous
22 hours ago
1
1
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
15 hours ago
@anonymous: Even in this case, you should still check the published paper -- pirated or not -- to make sure that you are citing correctly. For example, it is possible to have the numbering of theorems slightly changed in the published version of a math paper. Also sometimes authors might make some changes in the review which they do not bother to (or are not allowed to) propagate to preprint servers.
– tomasz
15 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
14 hours ago
@tomasz Obviously, the point was about the ethics though...
– anonymous
14 hours ago
"Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website." -- additionally, at least in some jurisdictions, distributing a link to a pirated version is outright illegal.
– aland
9 hours ago
"Remember to cite the source appropriately; a journal or a book, not a pirate website." -- additionally, at least in some jurisdictions, distributing a link to a pirated version is outright illegal.
– aland
9 hours ago
add a comment |
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
8
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
yesterday
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
yesterday
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
yesterday
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
17 hours ago
1
@guifa: MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR --- I don't know how that would apply to me (and I don't really care either) because I have literally tens of thousands of photocopied papers and paper preprints obtained since the mid 1980s (arguably the early 1960s if you count the preprint archive I received from a well known researcher in my field in the mid 1990s), from many dozens of libraries, and other than an occasional library stamp on a photocopied page or remembering where I got the paper from, I would have no way of knowing. (continued)
– Dave L Renfro
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
8
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
yesterday
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
yesterday
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
yesterday
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
17 hours ago
1
@guifa: MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR --- I don't know how that would apply to me (and I don't really care either) because I have literally tens of thousands of photocopied papers and paper preprints obtained since the mid 1980s (arguably the early 1960s if you count the preprint archive I received from a well known researcher in my field in the mid 1990s), from many dozens of libraries, and other than an occasional library stamp on a photocopied page or remembering where I got the paper from, I would have no way of knowing. (continued)
– Dave L Renfro
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
If you are at a reputable university you can probably get legal access to nearly everything you need for research just by visiting your university's library and asking for a copy of the article. This is nearly always available to you. If you are grant funded, then grant funds can probably be used to obtain the necessary papers if the university cannot get them. In the US, even my town library has been able to get me access to things just by asking and because they have developed relationships with other (university) libraries. Small universities can have formal relationships with large research universities to "borrow" books and articles.
Likewise, borrowing the resources of colleagues is permitted. If s/he has a legal copy s/he can print it. The printed copy can be loaned to you. There are no issues with this at all.
So, the situation you describe should be rare if you do a bit of legwork.
But if you cite something, cite a legal repository, not a website known to pirate academic work. You don't need to actually own a copy of a paper to cite it, but it is probably a mistake (for your reputation) to flaunt illegal or unethical access.
It probably isn't as difficult or as costly as you imagine to do the right thing.
answered yesterday
BuffyBuffy
49.1k13160244
49.1k13160244
8
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
yesterday
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
yesterday
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
yesterday
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
17 hours ago
1
@guifa: MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR --- I don't know how that would apply to me (and I don't really care either) because I have literally tens of thousands of photocopied papers and paper preprints obtained since the mid 1980s (arguably the early 1960s if you count the preprint archive I received from a well known researcher in my field in the mid 1990s), from many dozens of libraries, and other than an occasional library stamp on a photocopied page or remembering where I got the paper from, I would have no way of knowing. (continued)
– Dave L Renfro
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
8
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
yesterday
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
yesterday
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
yesterday
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
17 hours ago
1
@guifa: MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR --- I don't know how that would apply to me (and I don't really care either) because I have literally tens of thousands of photocopied papers and paper preprints obtained since the mid 1980s (arguably the early 1960s if you count the preprint archive I received from a well known researcher in my field in the mid 1990s), from many dozens of libraries, and other than an occasional library stamp on a photocopied page or remembering where I got the paper from, I would have no way of knowing. (continued)
– Dave L Renfro
7 hours ago
8
8
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
yesterday
Or just don't cite the repository at all. I mean, if I have a paper copy.of the journal vs a scanned copy I get from another library vs a publisher-provided PDF and all are identical, the repository shouldn't matter and many (most?) style manuals don't require you to cite the exact location you obtained the copy except for rare one-of-a-kind works like medieval manuscripts, etc. (Although MLA started so in protest I've decided my next paper I'm going to cite every library involved in an ILL transaction to show how stupid it is)
– guifa
yesterday
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
yesterday
@guifa Could you expand on the MLA part, maybe with a link? It sounds wholly impractical.
– Anyon
yesterday
2
2
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
yesterday
@Anyon MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR we're supposed to cite JSTOR along with the article. It's the same article regardless, and most people just happily pretend they got it on paper to avoid doing it :-) I'm jus planning on taking it to the other extreme because to me a library is no different than JSTOR
– guifa
yesterday
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
17 hours ago
If you have legal access through your university, "pirating" it certainly isn't unethical.
– Solomonoff's Secret
17 hours ago
1
1
@guifa: MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR --- I don't know how that would apply to me (and I don't really care either) because I have literally tens of thousands of photocopied papers and paper preprints obtained since the mid 1980s (arguably the early 1960s if you count the preprint archive I received from a well known researcher in my field in the mid 1990s), from many dozens of libraries, and other than an occasional library stamp on a photocopied page or remembering where I got the paper from, I would have no way of knowing. (continued)
– Dave L Renfro
7 hours ago
@guifa: MLA8 wants us to specify the "container" so if we got an article from JSTOR --- I don't know how that would apply to me (and I don't really care either) because I have literally tens of thousands of photocopied papers and paper preprints obtained since the mid 1980s (arguably the early 1960s if you count the preprint archive I received from a well known researcher in my field in the mid 1990s), from many dozens of libraries, and other than an occasional library stamp on a photocopied page or remembering where I got the paper from, I would have no way of knowing. (continued)
– Dave L Renfro
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
11
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
23 hours ago
add a comment |
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
11
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
23 hours ago
add a comment |
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
Would you incriminate yourself?
For some articles, the abstract is so clear and concise that it effectively says everything you need to know in order to cite it. I've previously been advised when writing abstracts for articles in paywall journals to make sure someone could cite the article without actually having it. Obviously, it's not an ideal situation, but it is very much possible to cite an article purely based on the abstract, which you would have access to without acquiring the article anyway.
In short, if I see someone cite an article and I somehow know that they have not paid for access to it, I'd assume they've cited it based on the abstract.
answered yesterday
E. ReiE. Rei
852214
852214
11
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
23 hours ago
add a comment |
11
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
23 hours ago
11
11
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
23 hours ago
I would consider citing based only an abstract to be extremely bad practice; bordering on a mild form of academic malpractice. Yes, I know it happens, but that does not mean we should so casually accept it.
– Jack Aidley
23 hours ago
add a comment |
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if legal access isn't plausible.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
EDIT: I'm flabbergasted that a factual correct answer has four down votes. Especially as an answer that appeared afterwards, with essentially the same message is being up-voted. It makes be question why I bother helping people.
13
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
yesterday
7
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
yesterday
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
yesterday
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
22 hours ago
7
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
19 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if legal access isn't plausible.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
EDIT: I'm flabbergasted that a factual correct answer has four down votes. Especially as an answer that appeared afterwards, with essentially the same message is being up-voted. It makes be question why I bother helping people.
13
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
yesterday
7
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
yesterday
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
yesterday
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
22 hours ago
7
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
19 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if legal access isn't plausible.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
EDIT: I'm flabbergasted that a factual correct answer has four down votes. Especially as an answer that appeared afterwards, with essentially the same message is being up-voted. It makes be question why I bother helping people.
can we cite [(possibly) illegally obtained] documents[?]
Yes, but you might be incriminating yourself, if legal access isn't plausible.
can editorial board know...if I'm using those articles?
No. At least, not without collaboration.
EDIT: I'm flabbergasted that a factual correct answer has four down votes. Especially as an answer that appeared afterwards, with essentially the same message is being up-voted. It makes be question why I bother helping people.
edited 7 hours ago
answered yesterday
user2768user2768
13.9k23657
13.9k23657
13
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
yesterday
7
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
yesterday
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
yesterday
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
22 hours ago
7
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
19 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
13
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
yesterday
7
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
yesterday
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
yesterday
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
22 hours ago
7
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
19 hours ago
13
13
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
yesterday
You don't have to demonstrate legal access, in general. The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems.
– Federico Poloni
yesterday
7
7
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
yesterday
And as anyone that's ever marked undergraduate coursework will tell you, referencing an article is absolutely not proof that you've read it :)
– E. Rei
yesterday
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
yesterday
@FedericoPoloni Rephrasing as if you could not have legally accessed would perhaps be better, which the publisher might conceivably be able to do, e.g., with an argument such as: we accused has not paid for access, nor have their co-authors, nor have any of their institutions. Defending against such an argument could be problematic. (Not a lawyer.) Although, following from E.Rei, I suppose acknowledging academic misconduct works... Albeit, that requires lying if document were obtained illegally.
– user2768
yesterday
7
7
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
22 hours ago
@user2768 The point is that you can't reasonably tell who has legal access to a published paper. Even if somebody is at a university that doesn't have a subscription to that journal, there are so many other legitimate ways that the person could get access to the article without leaving any kind of paper trail, that nobody is ever going to conclude "You must have accessed that illegally."
– David Richerby
22 hours ago
7
7
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
19 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni "The burden of proof lies on the accuser, in most sane legal systems." This is true. Unfortunately, copyright enforcement goes well outside the bounds of sanity pretty much everywhere. If the requirement of the burden of proof being on the accuser were applied consistently, copyright-enforcement things such as DRM and the DMCA takedown system simply could not exist. But unfortunately, they do.
– Mason Wheeler
19 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
5
And to offer the contrasting take: Pirates steal nothing, as no thing is lost by the publisher. They are breaking ineffective and socially harmful laws to create net benefit for the society. Intellectual monopoly laws are a way of restricting property rights of people for no good benefit, and in a largely unenforceable way, which is used as an arbitrary punishment mechanism for little benefit to anyone but lawyers and certain big rent-seeking companies.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
1
Also, this does not really answer the question.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
This reads more like a criticism of the question than an answer. The OP already stated that they deem the act of publishing the documents unethical. Could you clarify in which way "is really not a valid question" provides a useful answer or at least a credible frame challenge?
– Ruther Rendommeleigh
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
5
And to offer the contrasting take: Pirates steal nothing, as no thing is lost by the publisher. They are breaking ineffective and socially harmful laws to create net benefit for the society. Intellectual monopoly laws are a way of restricting property rights of people for no good benefit, and in a largely unenforceable way, which is used as an arbitrary punishment mechanism for little benefit to anyone but lawyers and certain big rent-seeking companies.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
1
Also, this does not really answer the question.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
This reads more like a criticism of the question than an answer. The OP already stated that they deem the act of publishing the documents unethical. Could you clarify in which way "is really not a valid question" provides a useful answer or at least a credible frame challenge?
– Ruther Rendommeleigh
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
Isn't this the same thing as breaking into a house and stealing everything, then asking if it's ethical to watch Netflix using the victim's account?
You are asking the wrong question.
The unethicalness occurred long before the question of attribution arose. The publishers of the papers placed a value on them.. and you, for whatever reason, chose to obtain the document from a thief rather than the publisher. Just because "everyone else" is doing it and it's "wink wink" accepted practice in no way makes the act of theft ethical. Everything that follows from that act is then tainted by the original act of thievery.
So to recap...
- Pirate steals from publisher.
- You obtain copy of document from pirate, making you at best an accomplice and at worst a thief yourself.
- Question of ethics regarding attribution of stolen documents in your own paper is really not a valid question at this point.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 12 hours ago
Sam AxeSam Axe
891
891
New contributor
New contributor
5
And to offer the contrasting take: Pirates steal nothing, as no thing is lost by the publisher. They are breaking ineffective and socially harmful laws to create net benefit for the society. Intellectual monopoly laws are a way of restricting property rights of people for no good benefit, and in a largely unenforceable way, which is used as an arbitrary punishment mechanism for little benefit to anyone but lawyers and certain big rent-seeking companies.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
1
Also, this does not really answer the question.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
This reads more like a criticism of the question than an answer. The OP already stated that they deem the act of publishing the documents unethical. Could you clarify in which way "is really not a valid question" provides a useful answer or at least a credible frame challenge?
– Ruther Rendommeleigh
5 hours ago
add a comment |
5
And to offer the contrasting take: Pirates steal nothing, as no thing is lost by the publisher. They are breaking ineffective and socially harmful laws to create net benefit for the society. Intellectual monopoly laws are a way of restricting property rights of people for no good benefit, and in a largely unenforceable way, which is used as an arbitrary punishment mechanism for little benefit to anyone but lawyers and certain big rent-seeking companies.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
1
Also, this does not really answer the question.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
This reads more like a criticism of the question than an answer. The OP already stated that they deem the act of publishing the documents unethical. Could you clarify in which way "is really not a valid question" provides a useful answer or at least a credible frame challenge?
– Ruther Rendommeleigh
5 hours ago
5
5
And to offer the contrasting take: Pirates steal nothing, as no thing is lost by the publisher. They are breaking ineffective and socially harmful laws to create net benefit for the society. Intellectual monopoly laws are a way of restricting property rights of people for no good benefit, and in a largely unenforceable way, which is used as an arbitrary punishment mechanism for little benefit to anyone but lawyers and certain big rent-seeking companies.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
And to offer the contrasting take: Pirates steal nothing, as no thing is lost by the publisher. They are breaking ineffective and socially harmful laws to create net benefit for the society. Intellectual monopoly laws are a way of restricting property rights of people for no good benefit, and in a largely unenforceable way, which is used as an arbitrary punishment mechanism for little benefit to anyone but lawyers and certain big rent-seeking companies.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
1
1
Also, this does not really answer the question.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
Also, this does not really answer the question.
– Tommi Brander
5 hours ago
This reads more like a criticism of the question than an answer. The OP already stated that they deem the act of publishing the documents unethical. Could you clarify in which way "is really not a valid question" provides a useful answer or at least a credible frame challenge?
– Ruther Rendommeleigh
5 hours ago
This reads more like a criticism of the question than an answer. The OP already stated that they deem the act of publishing the documents unethical. Could you clarify in which way "is really not a valid question" provides a useful answer or at least a credible frame challenge?
– Ruther Rendommeleigh
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Syafiq Zaidi is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f125570%2fciting-paywalled-articles-accessed-via-illegal-web-sharing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
5
This is a great question. It seems that you are not asking about the ethics of downloading articles from questionable sites, but only the ethics afterwards - when the downloading is already a fait accompli, and the real question is whether citing said document counts as an additional unethical act above and beyond what you did when you downloaded it (e.g. "citing a document obtained through an unauthorized route"). Does this sound right?
– Robert Columbia
20 hours ago
5
That the provenance of a source actually used be questionable in no way makes it anything other than completely unethical to fail to cite the source that has been used. This seems entirely obvious.
– Dan Fox
18 hours ago
10
Note that illegal and unethical are not necessarily the same thing. Indeed, many academics (also on this site) do not consider illegal access to articles behind paywall to be at all unethical.
– tomasz
16 hours ago
4
@tomasz : also, in many jurisdictions, it's not the downloading is what is illegal (or at least enforceably illegal), but the uploading to such sites.
– vsz
8 hours ago