> But it's crazy that 100 year old scientific works can still be under copyright and illegal to distribute. That's why it shouldn't be considered plagiarism fo

> But it's crazy that 100 year old scientific works can still be under copyright and illegal to distribute. That's why it shouldn't be considered plagiarism for the author or someone eles to republish those works at freer pastures. But who are we kidding, many journals refuse to publish validation of existing studies, which is the basis of empirical science. They refuse to do science properly and we are worried about them not giving access to information.