4 ms·

aXriv is funded by Cornell. How will JSTO be a "good faith steward" if they give all of their content away and make it available for free? They have to pay the

aXriv is funded by Cornell. How will JSTO be a "good faith steward" if they give all of their content away and make it available for free? They have to pay their bills to maintain the infrastructure to support all of this and pay their employees to do so. Charging for article access is how this is accomplished and how the company behind this allows the service to continue. There is a lot more money behind the operation that just copying pdf's to an s3 bucket.

politician 14y ago
There is a difference between public domain works, non-public-domain works, and value-added services. I've made this distinction clear in my arguments.
- res0nat0r 14y ago
  My point: They have to charge what they do to continue doing what they do.
  - politician 14y ago
    We agree that to operate a business one needs revenues. We agree that sales of non-public-domain works and value-added services are appropriate avenues for improving revenues. Where we differ in opinion seems to be that I do not believe that a company can take a public domain work, wave a magic terms of service, and then sell it back to the public.
    - res0nat0r 14y ago
      This actually happens all of the time, see the copies of Shakespeare and Beethoven on sale at your local bookstore. The content is being repackaged and sold, but that doesn't negate the fact that the works are still available for free somewhere else because they are public domain.
      - politician 14y ago
        I'm not doing a particularly good job of pinning you down, but look, my complaint is that regardless of the availability of particular individual public domain works JSTOR's TOS contains language preventing the coordinated download of the entire public domain archive, and will block your MAC address if you try to download too much of the public's works.
        res0nat0r 14y ago
        Correct. Downloading their entire archive and putting it online somewhere else puts their business at risk and will prevent them from recouping costs they've invested and asked users to pay for (by legally signing up for an account and paying them). Just because it is public domain doesn't mean it can be taken and posted elsewhere.
        politician 14y ago
        I disagree with the premise that it can be called "their" archive if it contains none but public domain works. Can you have ownership over a collection of things that you don't own? "Just because it is public domain doesn't mean it can be taken and posted elsewhere." No, that is precisely what it means - the collective commons owns this; ownership means having the right to use your property. These works are your property, my property, our property.
        res0nat0r 14y ago
        You cannot walk into Barnes and Noble and take a copy of Penguin Publishings' The Complete Works of William Shakespeare off of the shelf and walk out with it without paying just because the work is in the public domain (Note: lets not get into the digital vs. physical depriving anyone of content argument for the 10000th time). Time and money was spent organizing and publishing the book / article, so they do have a right to charge for it. If you want wholesale free access to public domain documents, then you find a place which will provide these to you for free. You don't get to ignore a companies right to charge for something just because you disagree with the premise.

politician 14y ago

There is a difference between public domain works, non-public-domain works, and value-added services. I've made this distinction clear in my arguments.

res0nat0r 14y ago
My point: They have to charge what they do to continue doing what they do.
- politician 14y ago
  We agree that to operate a business one needs revenues. We agree that sales of non-public-domain works and value-added services are appropriate avenues for improving revenues. Where we differ in opinion seems to be that I do not believe that a company can take a public domain work, wave a magic terms of service, and then sell it back to the public.
  - res0nat0r 14y ago
    This actually happens all of the time, see the copies of Shakespeare and Beethoven on sale at your local bookstore. The content is being repackaged and sold, but that doesn't negate the fact that the works are still available for free somewhere else because they are public domain.
    - politician 14y ago
      I'm not doing a particularly good job of pinning you down, but look, my complaint is that regardless of the availability of particular individual public domain works JSTOR's TOS contains language preventing the coordinated download of the entire public domain archive, and will block your MAC address if you try to download too much of the public's works.
      - res0nat0r 14y ago
        Correct. Downloading their entire archive and putting it online somewhere else puts their business at risk and will prevent them from recouping costs they've invested and asked users to pay for (by legally signing up for an account and paying them). Just because it is public domain doesn't mean it can be taken and posted elsewhere.
        politician 14y ago
        I disagree with the premise that it can be called "their" archive if it contains none but public domain works. Can you have ownership over a collection of things that you don't own? "Just because it is public domain doesn't mean it can be taken and posted elsewhere." No, that is precisely what it means - the collective commons owns this; ownership means having the right to use your property. These works are your property, my property, our property.
        res0nat0r 14y ago
        You cannot walk into Barnes and Noble and take a copy of Penguin Publishings' The Complete Works of William Shakespeare off of the shelf and walk out with it without paying just because the work is in the public domain (Note: lets not get into the digital vs. physical depriving anyone of content argument for the 10000th time). Time and money was spent organizing and publishing the book / article, so they do have a right to charge for it. If you want wholesale free access to public domain documents, then you find a place which will provide these to you for free. You don't get to ignore a companies right to charge for something just because you disagree with the premise.